I've read all the comments in this discussion (up until the time I started this). I think the fixation on manual is ridiculous. If I get the picture I want, it doesn't matter how I got there; if I don't get the picture I want, it's a failure, regardless of how pure my method was.

I started with a Canon FTbn, after really getting the bug from using a Nikkormat at work. I had handled and seen cameras without meters, but I counted myself fortunate to have a match-needle camera to take up 35mm photography. I went to a bullfight in Spain--I couldn't keep up with the changing exposure as the action moved from full shade to full sun and the manual focus, too--I got a lot of good pictures, but I missed a bunch, and I botched a few (film, of course). I was delighted when the A-1 came out, and I bought one as soon as I had the chance. The auto-exposure capabilities made it a much easier camera to use to capture the picture I wanted under changing lighting; it made no difference at all in how I evaluated my settings when I was not dealing with varying light. The split focus screen with the microprism was a good focusing system in good light when speed was not critical, but left a lot to be desired in low light or with fast-moving subjects.

When I first bought a DSLR, I stuck with Canon, a 20D, and its kit lens. I happily used it for several years, adding a telephoto lens; I was given a EF 24-105mm, and pretty much moved to it. I had occasional moments of envy of friends with a 5D; I finally bought a 5D Mark III. It had, and still has, a dizzying array of options and settings to understand and use. I used it for the last five years and have been very pleased with it, and with the pictures I could capture, but disappointment with some failures. I happened to experiment with the 20D again last year--I was appalled to be reminded that I had taken pictures for seven years with a max ISO of 1600 (and a noisy max at that) and lived with the inherent limitations. I am still frustrated with autofocus sometimes, even as good as the 5D Mark III is most of the time--the manual focus clues are not nearly good enough with older eyes and bifocals.

I generally use the P mode, choosing an ISO that matches the lighting, until that mode does not give me the settings I think I need to end up with the picture I want. I switch to whichever mode makes it easy for me to set what I want fixed and adjust the setting I am willing to vary. I rely on autofocus--I am just now learning how to use all the various options in my camera to help me with the autofocus under other than average circumstances--but when it doesn't work, I have the workarounds I need to get what I want. I use exposure compensation as I think circumstances require, and add the exposure and metering lock techniques as needed to create the results I want.

It never bothered me when I was flying that I used a jet and all the technology built into the navigation systems to get where I was going; I didn't mind giving up the simple single-engine plane where I first learned to fly for the advantages of power, speed, range, and adverse weather options in the much more advanced jets. Nobody I worked for cared that the flying was not "manual," they just looked at the results. Likewise, in helicopters, I never minded that I jumped straight to the automated throttle, power controls, and hydraulics of a modern jet-engined chopper instead of having a manual throttle, unassisted physical flight controls, and no instruments for flying in the weather--all that equipment and advanced technology made achieving the goals in using the helicopters possible. Making the flying easier made mission accomplishment much more likely, compared with the capabilities of the rudimentary beginnings of flight.

I have no desire to go back to the stick-shift for driving, either, or to give up air conditioning, radio/CD/Bluetooth, cell phones, or power steering in my cars, although I was thrilled to learn on vehicles without all those amenities. I like going where I want in comfort and relative luxury.

Similarly, I will use whatever helps me get the picture I want; I know how to adapt to achieve that end, but I don't see any need to tax my attention with unnecessary manipulations just to claim I am shooting "manual." I have every intention of adding the capabilities of more advanced cameras to my toolkit, if I last long enough to want another one.

The result is the measure of a photographer, not the tools.