druthven

My point being that many landscapes require the very close and very distant objects both be in acceptable focus. Having the lens automatically set the hyperfocal distance to achieve that seemed to be an excellent idea. BTW,FYI I had to google ROTFLMFAO. Glad you had a good laugh.

Dan' de Bourgogne

Charles 46277 Loc: Fulton County, KY

When I shot outdoor scenes in large format, I found acceptable DOF from a chart or wheel, and then stopped down another stop for better focus. (In large format, small apertures have much less diffraction.) If I could gain a bit of height in the camera, the foreground was farther away and more likely to fall into DOF--that is why Adams had a shooting platform on top of his vehicle. The foreground could start at 15 or 20 feet away, or more, so focusing around 30 feet would cover distant scenes at f22 or f32.

In those days people wanted sharpness overall except for special cases, but now it is fashionable to make everything as blurry as possible except the subject--or it seems sometimes that the bokeh is itself the subject. People stand around admiring and complimenting the exquisite fuzziness captured. It is no accident that this arises with the small formats we use now. They begin to fall apart with small apertures. Stacking focus for near and far is a protest against this, but it seldom looks natural (to me)...

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

"f/8 and be there" assumes you couldn't afford better equipment.

Charles 46277 Loc: Fulton County, KY

But since there was no better equipment for the job, the assumption is probably that photojournalism (like written journalism) does not or cannot require the best work. Reporters must write whether they have anything to say or not; and photojournalists must produce pictures whether they are good or not. But Twain, Dickens, and Hemingway wrote for papers, and Eisenstadt, Capa, and others took pictures for them. Similarly, Galileo's telescope was really bad.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I know my equipment. I know apertures smaller than f/13 get softer due to diffraction, negating any attempt of a sharper and deeper depth of field for 35mm digital.

I know my equipment. I know where to focus into a scene for a given aperture to capture a deep (or shallow) depth of field.

I know my equipment. I have practiced the finger dexterity to move the AF point / group of points around the frame to capture the point of interest in sharp focus, with the camera held to my eye in a shooting position.

I know my equipment. If I need a faster response, I preposition the AF point / group before even raising the camera to my eye. The camera is ready for the composition I plan to capture.

I know my equipment. I shoot in short bursts using the camera's continuous focus mode. I engage the AF as soon as the camera is raised to my eye and then release the shutter as the situation occurs.

I know my equipment. I've shot and reviewed, at the 1:1 pixel-level detail, every aperture of every lens mounted to every compatible body. I know the sharpest apertures of every lens and I know the characteristics of every lens at every aperture. There are no unexpected results.

I know my equipment. Most of my AF-capable digital-age lenses are hard to focus manually. They're not very precise. My manual film-age lenses, adapted to mirrorless digital, they're now exceeding 'easy' to focus using the 10x EVF zoom display, letting me focus on the precise details, way better than they ever performed on SLRs. Again, I have the practiced finger dexterity to manage the camera when held to my eye in a shooting position.

You talk about the old days and how the equipment worked. Everything above is what people did in the old days at great time, detailed note taking, and expense of film. Today, these same best practices and depth of experience is so much easier to develop in digital. But, it doesn't seem like you're aware of the need to practice and perfect your craft using this modern digital toolset. None of your greats would be impressed at your lack of practice and failure to develop a deep and intuitive level of skill with everyday modern tools they could only dream of.

Charles 46277 Loc: Fulton County, KY

You should have a t-shirt that says, "I am a photographer, and I know things." A good deal of what you list is knowledge of what you cannot do--the limits of your equipment--such as what their best aperture is (which is to say, which apertures are not their best), or that digital-age lenses are hard to focus manually.

I only just got a mirrorless camera, and have no experience with it yet (except to take a few shots to verify that it works). But you are right that I will have to rely on experience about depth of field and other things in order to benefit from it. I am pretty comfortable with the Canon 650D which I have used for the last dozen years or so, but there are many things in my R5 I will have to learn. I suspect that people today who buy a first camera will never have a clue about what it can do (or what it does do)--as indeed we never use all the possibilities in our computers.

In 20 years selling cameras, I found that too many people bought cameras that soon remained hidden in some closet because they did not learn how to use the features it offered. I did my best to prevent that, and I had to ask more questions than I answered. They said, "I want the best camera you have--that does everything for you." What they really wanted was a simple camera without many settings to worry about, like a Yashica Electro 35 rangefinder. My theory was that a first camera should make a very fine back-up or second camera later on, as one progresses in needs and desires.

Your remark that mirrorless cameras are easier to focus manually with manual film camera lenses is encouraging. I have some nice Takumar prime lenses I can try with adapter if I suspect the digital zooms are not the best in some cases. (I can't afford all the new primes I would l would like.) But of course I will have to master the new equipment--which was all developed to improve the performance of old techniques and experience.

My doctorate is in philosophy, which indicates that I favor ponderous book-study, which I love in itself, so practical craft is more an adventure than a profession for me. I am sure this shows in my posts, as the first thing I did to learn photography was to study books on it, and this need not be considered a flaw unless you want something else from me.

When you say there are never any unexpected results, you characterize the professional exactly. Predictability is a major selling point, but surprising other people can be a great gift. Ticking every box and following every standard is probably a goal in professional work that amateurs are less likely to achieve, partly because they can't, but sometimes because they have the time to waste on surprises in the hope of something different. It is more like a Sunday drive without specific speed requirements or even destinations. This is different from the taxi driver or race car driver.

As what is good includes knowing limits (seeing what does not work well), being good must include making all the mistakes--in your case, by systematic tests, if not by never making an error.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

There are two tools of all mirrorless and one of IBIS-enabled models that make legacy MF lenses 'better' on digital cameras.

1, The focus peeking mentioned above where you can zoom the EVF to the 10x details and very precisely focus the image / lens. Different models enable this feature differently. On my Sony, I can reassign a menu option to an external button. Native mirrorless lenses and certain mount adapters have a 'control ring' that can be programmed to any of several options, including a twist that 'pops' the EVF to that 10x zoom.

2, Once the lens is precisely focused, one can also adjust the EVF display to show the plane of focus as a shimmering color in the display. I've found that shimmer (I use red, yellow and white are other options) is not very precise alone. But, if you've focused precisely at 10x, you can rely on the relative movement of the shimmer as you adjust the focus plane slightly forward or back.

3, And finally, bodies that provide stabilization support to these legacy lenses are a great enabler of better overall results. The only limit of MF lenses on these IBIS models is you have manually set / configure the lens focal length as the camera can't detect this value automagically.

Maybe a 4 are the exposure mode options. I shoot adapted MF lenses on mirrorless in shutter priority mode with AUTO ISO. The camera is configured to release the shutter with no lens attached / detected. It just meters the light as hitting the sensor at whatever manually set aperture I'm using on the lens. So, I can adjust the shutterspeed to freeze the subject and / or the slowest speed I can control with the IBIS assist. Having control of the aperture too, this is like Manual mode with AUTO ISO, where I can also apply EC to how the meter brightens the image.

Charles 46277 Loc: Fulton County, KY

Thanks--you led me to those things in the long online manual. I tried a Pentax lens on the Canon R, shutter priority. It is pretty easy to focus by sight for general scenes. I will have to look further about the shimmering-focus. Sounds like a more vivid version of the old bristling donut ring in the film SLR split image circle. I did not see a way to focus while stopped down (so far).

However, I expect to work first with these lenses that are compatible by design: Canon RF 16mm f2.8, Canon EF L 17-40mm f4, RF 85mm f2 Macro, and EF L 100-400mm. That should keep me busy for a while.

User ID

With that genre of camera, when using an "alien" lens, shutter priority mode would be effectively manual mode (and possibly without any metering). Some cameras wont even offer that, and will message that the lens is not properly mounted.

OTOH aperture priority mode should provide auto exposure by the camera varying the shutter speed. Program mode should also behave as if it were aperture priority mode.

I just put a Mamiya M42 lens on an EOS and it behaved as described. Shutter priority is an M-mode with NO metering. Both P-mode and A-mode are effectively A-mode. M-mode does provide metering.

Seems to me that shutter priority is really the least useful mode, having neither AE nor any manual metering readout.

M42 on EOS

(Download)

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Charles, I tend to intermingle the technical terms, shooting manual focus lenses only on a Sony mirrorless. In the Canon PDF manual, text search for "peaking" or "outline emphasis". In the EOS R5 manual, that camera allows you to select a color and a level, try "high" to make the color most obvious. This is the shimmering color setting I'm suggesting.

Regarding focusing with the aperture stepped down, try adjusting the setting for "Exposure Simulation". This is how I focus my MF lenses at the selected aperture, and just compose and shoot. On some rare situations, I also change the ISO from AUTO to manual and them pump up the ISO to focus, only static macro situations, then just lower the ISO back to the desired value and shoot.

Charles 46277 Loc: Fulton County, KY

Well, of course we can just compose and focus wide open, then stop down to shoot... if the subject holds still.

I found the peaking functions but have not found out how to get out of the data screens and go to normal viewing... The manual said how to get in--but not how to get out. Just turning the camera off and on did not clear it. I will figure it out later.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

I don’t know Canon. Sometimes it’s the menu button but I’m pretty sure in all my cameras a half shutter press will do it.

User ID

Those two are always the first things to try on ANY brand of camera, pretty much universal for the menu system.

Acoarst the OP might be stuck in one of the "Quick Menu" screens. Usually the same button that gets you into those also gets you back out ("I" button, "Q" button, etc).

Its hard to tell what the OP really means by "data" screens ... main menus or quick menus. Data screen ?

Charles 46277 Loc: Fulton County, KY

Well, nothing seemed to work earlier (even shooting a picture), but this time that worked. (I switched to AV and took a picture normally.))