bleirer

And now they have put back the control ring, and you can set it for aperture (or anything else or nothing). On Canon RF lenses at least. I don't know for other models.

srt101fan

on your last paragraph!

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

Right, and one of my cameras now only offers full Manual and Aperture Priority -- I couldn't care less. What matters is only the bottom line: You are setting the exposure. The camera modes P,S,A,M all provide the user full control over shutter speed and f/stop choice. As long as you're making that choice there's no critical difference just operational differences that could frankly change with the design of the camera. For example you mention the lens aperture ring. I use both Nikon and Fuji cameras. My Fuji lenses have aperture rings and my Nikon lenses don't. Big bleepin' deal -- if I can't adapt to that as a triviality I have no business using either of them.

Joe

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

It's really pretty simple...

Autofocus, when used correctly, is faster and more accurate than I ever was shooting manually. I take more shots and more of them are well focused, thanks to autofocus. I shot sports and wildlife with manual focus gear for a couple decades. And I was darned good at it, too!. Even so, now using AF I am able to take shots I never could before. It's faster than I ever was and more accurate! Focus is either right or it's wrong. There's no middle ground.

I don't use the "latest and greatest" AF systems with face and eye detection. Maybe some day I will. I sort of feel that takes automation too far. I'd feel like I wasn't "doing my job" as a photographer, giving up all focusing decisions to the camera in that way. Even with these innovative new features, as good as they appear to be, I still feel selecting a single AF point and me working to keep it right where I want camera & lens to focus will produce the most "keepers"... In most situations will give me the most images where focus is nailed.

However, I'm also the first to admit that there are times single point focusing is difficult or impossible to do. There are times when subjects are moving very quickly or unpredictably, where face or eye focus could well do a better job than me. And I'd have no hesitation using it. I'd probably be more likely to use it than "zone" or "group" focus, which leaves more up to chance.

It's not the same with auto exposure. There are times and places it works very well. But there are also many times when a camera's reflective metering system is "fooled" into making incorrect exposures... Times when I can do a better job setting it all myself or when I need to intervene to tweak AE with exposure compensation.

It's the same with auto white balance.... often it works very well. But there are other situations where it doesn't. Since I mostly shoot RAW, it doesn't matter very much because I can easily change color temp and tint later in post-processing. But when I shoot JPEGs I will sometimes set a custom white balance in situations where I know auto WB won't give the results I want.

Exposure and white balance are also more open to personal preference and interpretation that can vary from shot to shot, where focus is much less so.

Even if automation were able to make a "perfect" exposure every time ... There still would be situations where I'd want a high key effect, deliberate over-exposure. Other times I may want a silhouette and need to use under-exposure. It's similar with white balance. Sometimes I might want a warmer look... other times something cooler. I usually leave those adjustments to post-processing, since I shoot RAW. But if I wanted I could tweak things in-camera.

Auto exposure is far from "prefect" though. It gets fooled A LOT.



uh? How can there be a disagreement or lack of "resolution"? When M is used with Auto ISO, it's no longer "manual". Period. Auto ISO makes M another auto exposure mode. There really isn't any room for discussion. It's auto exposure any time the camera is making some of the exposure decisions, as it does with aperture priority, shutter priority, program AND Auto ISO + M (as well as certain flash modes). It's only truly "manual" exposure when the photographer is making all the exposure decisions and settings: M without Auto ISO (also B on some cameras).

I'm not disparaging "auto" or "manual". The different orms of auto and manual exposure have their uses, depending upon circumstances. I have no idea what your "position" on this might be. I didn't know differing positions were even possible. It's simply a fact that when Auto ISO is enabled with M, it becomes another form of auto exposure.

I know there are some folks who shoot with their cameras set up that way while espousing "manual exposure" as if it were the holy grail and while swearing the only way to shoot... even though they actually aren't doing it themselves.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Pentax makes that clear by calling 'M' + auto ISO 'TAv' mode - just one of the auto modes.

bleirer

I would call manual with auto ISO with exposure compensation the moral equivalent of manual, but I agree that by itself it is just another auto mode.

Ratelliott

👍

cambriaman Loc: Central CA Coast

That's what I do. It does require understanding how ISO, aperture and shutter speed interact and what the effects of the extremes are! I would hope that except for newbies everyone on UHH can do that.

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

No provocation here. Although manual mode is often used, I do not "treasure" any particular mode, therefore my boundaries remain limitless. Not being snarky, but it is the best way I can answer your inquiry. Good topic.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

You sound just like me and change to Auto-i, Aperture mode, Shutter mode, Manual mode, Auto-ISO or set ISO, manual focus, burst mode, etc. as necessary to get the shot. Yes, my camera is set on Program mode and single shot auto focus coming out of the bag. But it will not stay that way if I can not get the shot that way. If I shot a different style or different subjects than I now shoot, the camera might have totally different settings coming out of the bag. Your and my settings, I feel, allow us to start shooting the quickest whatever we shoot. Sometimes I am lucky to have even 5 minutes to shoot with. One can not be spending a lot of time with settings or one will lose the opportunity to even shoot the subject. Yes, with more time, one can explore other settings, perspectives, and capture more details of and about the subject in front of you. But if that "more time" never comes, what does one have? The ghost town that I took a few shots of and then had to leave, with the intent to return, is no longer there, burned to the ground by partying highschoolers. What does this have to do about settings? If I didn't use Program mode, auto focus, and shoot quickly, the number of shots and shooting angles would have been substantially less. There is no longer "more time" in this case. The idea is to shoot more, not less. One must shoot for today; nothing is guaranteed for tomorrow. Anything that gets you today's shots the way you need the shots is the correct camera settings.

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

To me, there are three things that control light, which is what makes an exposure. That is ISO, aperture, and shutter speed. You control that light in manual mode, you need to set all three. In the old folks days we bought film rated for the light conditions were were going to shoot in (iso), them set shutter speed and aperture to complete the exposure. If we changed light conditions, we would change the roll of him out (changing iso). With digital, we still do the same thing, but instead of changing a toll of him, we turn a knob.

Focus used to be completely manual. Now we have auto focus, which speeds up the focus process, but focus is not part of exposure. It does however make for a pleasing photo to look at, but does not control exposure, which is what we are talking about when we say we are shooting manual.

Godzilla

If anyone has ever shot a fully manual camera they know the boundaries of the operation, although personally I don’t consider manual cameras limiting, it’s just a different animal. Pre-vision helps a lot. If one wants to shoot faster then it’s a case of being prepared for what may come. If the light is even your pre-set and one only has to focus. One example of this is to look at the number of newspaper photographs taken with Graphic 4x5’s. Remember the slogan F8 and be there? On the other hand if one has only known Auto Exp/Auto Focus cameras then that’s another deal. I personally find Auto cameras a supreme opportunity for me to shoot a lot of frames of the same thing. (: Your not burning film and there’s no processing costs. What could be better? Of course menu systems are a drag.

Personally I do tho love fully manual Metal cameras such as Leica’s, Nikon’s and others including MF. Their wonderful pieces of metal machinery, and when I use them I have a tendency to slow down, look and enjoy what I’m doing.

BebuLamar

Although the thread was only started yesterday it's long so I didn't read all the responses. So to just answer the OP.
I don't know if it's correct to say that I treasure manual operation. I do enjoy using a camera in full manual that is manual focus (with a reflex viewfinder and without any focusing aid like split image or microprism and also not a mirrorless or a rangefinder, although I do enjoy a camera with scale focusing), manual exposure control without a meter. I do enjoy that a lot and do that often.
I do not put a limit on automation as I think whatever automation provides me with some conveniences sometimes I would use it. I don't use the following features only because I find them less convenient than not. They are Scenes mode, Green Full Auto, Exposure compensation, Exposure lock, Auto bracketing, P and S modes, Auto ISO with manual (I do use auto ISO in A mode).

Manglesphoto Loc: 70 miles south of St.Louis

The only auto feature I use is Auto focus, used for casual photos and moving subjects, the reason being I cannot focus fast enough.
Everything else I shoot manual:The reason is that how I learned!! I found that trying to understand all of the Auto mumbo-jumbo to confusing and not worth learning.
I found its better for ME and its all about ME, well for the most part.

srt101fan

A solid answer. And you didn't mention the word "control"!.......