JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

The topic of Manual vs Auto has been discussed many times on UHH, and the opinions range from the pragmatic "Manual is just another shooting mode on the camera that is to be used when appropriate" to the almost paranoid "If you don't shoot 'full manual' all the time you don't yet understand photography. Period!!!" So I am curious to know what the good folks on UHH think constitutes full manual shooting; and is there perhaps a grey area where one can shoot semi-manual without being labelled a P&S user?

Today's cameras are rich with bells and whistles, so to frame the discussion let's put aside all of the in-camera picture effects such as toy camera, pop color, posterization, miniature, etc, as well as the creative styles or scene modes like sports, portrait, landscape, macro, sunset, beach, night scene, etc. The picture effects essentially provide pre-programmed PP manipulations that can be better done on the computer, while the creative styles set several shooting parameters that clearly put the user in the "auto camp". What we are left with then are a small collection of shooting features like auto-focus, single/continuous shooting, auto bracketing, etc, and the "biggie" of exposure control.

Starting with exposure control, is "full manual" restricted to not using ANY of the camera's "assistive" capabilities? Clearly the mode dial setting is "M" and I will be manually selecting f-stop, shutter speed and ISO to balance the exposure triangle. But can I use the camera's meter as a guide or do I have to estimate the exposure based only on my guess at how the lighting situation has changed from sunny f/16? I suppose it is OK to chimp the image on the LCD screen to see if further adjustments to exposure are warranted… or is it?

If my camera supports auto-ISO in M mode, is it acceptable to take advantage of it as I play liberally and creatively with shutter speed and f-stop, or do I still have to manually set all 3 of the exposure parameters to proclaim myself a full manual shooter? Again, can I use the camera meter as a guide (in this case for setting ISO), or not?

Still in M mode, if my camera does not support auto-ISO then I will select an ISO value (call it fixed-ISO) that is a compromise between light sensitivity and noise. I will then choose either shutter speed or f-stop as the primary controlled parameter, and I will adjust the f-stop or shutter speed, respectively, as the secondary parameter to get an appropriate exposure. Again, can I use the camera meter as a guide for setting that secondary parameter? I will assume it is OK to chimp.

In the fixed-ISO case, if I am permitted to use the camera meter to recommend a setting for the secondary parameter AND I choose to manually set exactly that value, then how is this any different from using either aperture or shutter priority mode to set the primary parameter and simply letting the camera set the secondary parameter automatically? In other words, can I use A or S modes and still claim to be shooting manually because I have consciously set the primary parameter, or has moving the mode dial away from the magic M put me in the "auto camp"?

If I select P mode (and a manually fixed-ISO) then I have essentially given shutter speed and f-stop selection to the camera and I would admit that I am now shooting auto, not manual. However, I can spin a control wheel in P mode to "shift the program" to new values of shutter speed and f-stop. Am I now back to being a manual shooter because I have exercised a modicum of control over the camera's default settings? Or am I in the grey zone of semi-manual and/or semi-automatic?

Beyond P, A, S & M we have modes like Auto, i-Auto or Auto+ where we have virtually no control over anything other than perhaps activating the flash. That I would agree is shooting in "full-auto" mode.

Going beyond exposure control, does using features like auto-focus, single/continuous shooting, auto bracketing, etc, violate the principles of full manual shooting, or are these features fair game because the manual/auto camp criteria are limited to exposure control?

By now you have probably discerned that I do not fall into the purist "full-manual-all-the-time" camp. I use many of the features built into my camera, especially the exposure meter, to get as close to the final image as I can SOOC. I would even go so far as to say that I have often captured excellent photos because I let the camera do the heavy lifting, sometimes even in "full-auto" mode, and had I tried to override the automatic-split-second-decision-making-capabilities that are built into my camera I might have missed a great shot.

Full-manual shooters… load your weapons and fire away.

All others… show your support and stand by me. If you manage to capture a great shot by some means you will have achieved your goal and will not be a lesser person.

Kuzano

YES!

:thumbup:

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

Thank you!

J

MontanaTrace

I also enjoy in-camera HDR.

Yes, I enjoy the journey but it's a lot about the destination.

Often, I ride the elevator.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

John, the problem with this topic is that this horse has been dead for so long...., that my whip is broken.
The other problem is that there are Sooo many that don't really understand either one of the issues but will comment like they are experts, and some VERY loudly!!
I guess formulate your own conclusions based on your own personal experience and just go with that.
The problem is, who do you listen to? Do you listen to the loud talking authoritative sounding guy that's been shooting for 50 years but still can't shoot his way out of a paper bag...., or the soft spoken guy whose been shooting for 10 years and consistently wins Best-of-Shows in competitions but just doesn't bark much?!?!
There in, lies the conundrum!!! :lol:
Good luck......, SS.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

The Spotmatic that you mention in your signature was a "full" manual film camera ( I had one also). But it also had an on board meter. Many of us here started with film. In the dark ages they were all manual as auto features (of one kind or another) had yet to be invented. Today manual takes advantage of the cameras meter to get proper exposure. Sometimes a separate light meter is used-often for studio work While I use shutter priority most of the time, there are times I use manual. Personally I think that any one who maintains that unless you use manual you are not a real photographer is a snob. I think that one should take advantage of the bells and whistels in modern cameras. I also think that someone who uses a 2 or 3 thousand dollar camera as a point and shooter, is - shall we say foolish

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Actually there are no camp that I know off.

Manual shooters are control freaks when it comes to photography. I am one. To control one needs to understand more and learn more, all the time.

There is no right or wrong ,in my opinion, just a different approach to photography.

SS is absolutely right, it is about attitude.

Quixdraw Loc: x

John -- when I use manual, with my old lenses, it is no different than using one of my old film Nikons. I have shut off Auto Iso, set for 400 and watch the exposure. I am more likely to shoot in A, since I don't shoot a lot of fast moving things, aperture is more important to me than shutter speed most of the time. I have used some of the other settings and toys, but ex. Night vision and U1 (my custom color settings) and U 2 (my monochrome settings) it is mostly P M A. I feel it makes sense to take full advantage of the technology, but not be "stuck" on it.

srburg7860 Loc: Texas

My opinion...The camera is just a tool. Your specific situation should determine how you use that tool. I personally use auto, M, A & S and make the choice dependent upon the situation. When I have full control of the situation I generally go M. The less control I have on the situation the more I lean on the features available. I've blown too many shots locked into M when the situation wasn't controllable.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

I like the analogy...

Now when on top do you enjoy the fresh air more or less than the guy who took the stairways?

A bit like taking a shopper to access the top of mountain vs climbing it. Who learned the most and has the most pride?

What I am trying to say here is that is not only about the destination but how you got there.

Quixdraw Loc: x

:thumbup:

NIKONUT Loc: San Diego

Thanks!!!
Your discription of using "manual" to me really hits home. I, like so many other
Photographers had to use manual many years ago. I started in 1938 and started tapering off sometime in the '50/60's when cameras came out with point the camera and adjust the needle (semi-automatic.) at the subject. In today's world with all new kinds of electronics built in cameras, I think we are spoiled. I only use "manual" to make sure that which ever camera I pick up to use is set on A. I rely on the "LISA" system. L-lens, I-ISO, S-shutter speed, A-aperture. To me this keeps me in good place when I "shoot".

Even in this digital world, I prefer using the view finder/lcd to compose the image and not worry about looking to see if my settings are right. Of course "chimping" is acceptable.

Ched49 Loc: Pittsburgh, Pa.

For some reason, a lot of purist's think if you don't shoot in full manual all the time...your not a real photographer. And anything that has to do with "auto" is a bad word.

My take is, any mode that gives you a good looking photo, even...(gulp!) auto mode. When we shoot in "shutter priority" don't we trust the camera to select the right apeture? When we shoot in "apeture priority" don't we trust the camera to select the right shutter speed? Then why not shoot "auto" once in a while when a shooter doesn't have time to make the right selections?

I'm not into micro managing but a camera is designed to make photo's and it doesn't matter what mode you shoot in as long as you get the right exposure you want.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

When i encounter a shooter using manual only i keep my distance cause they might be a dangerous anal retentive control freak on crack.
Fortunately, or perhaps unfortunately, they usually turn out to be newbies who don't have the brain power required to effectively use the tools designed into their cameras.

chaman

Agree. You may call full manual shooters all you want. From what I have seen they are not control freaks but ARE in control. This is similar to the PP yes or no argument. Usually the people bad mouthing full manual shooters have tried it! But have never been able to fully understand it, dominate it or just gave up. No patience so they start to look for reasons to justify their decision. Of course they are going to find others to back them up. That does not mean they are understanding photography. Nope. To fully understand photography you need to get into manual. Im sorry to bust anyone's bubble but its the way it is. Its not an elitist argument at all but the reality of things.

An AUTO image may be very good, but a full MANUAL is usually better. Of all the pics you browse pick the ones that have made an impression...chances are they were taken in MANUAL. Why? Because the camera is a tool, and has a tool it works better when the person behind it knows a thing or two. If you are just into this for a pretty snapshot and pass a good time be it, but do not try to hide the fact that who shoots in MANUAL and gets good results really know and understand the primordial reason of photography....how to catch LIGHT, and catching light its not that difficult.

If you think that understanding the AUTO settings is an exercise of brain power, going manual may be quantum mechanics territory and I feel sorry for you.