blake_f Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>It takes me around 10-15 seconds to focus my Ziess 2.8 80mm CF lens with the standard Accu Matte focusing screen on my 503cx. That seems like a long time to me. I also notice that I cannot always find the sharpest, most in focus position on the focusing ring; I know it is there though. Is this normal or do I need to get my eyes checked?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_sunley Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>Well if you can't see fine print in sharp focus at a distance of one meter, you may need corrective lenses to use a camera. If you are over 40, it's time to get them checked, camera or no camera.</p> <p>Edit: To answer your question, maybe a second or two, or less, split image combined with microprisms make for nice focusing screens. :) Composing takes longer.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blake_f Posted July 15, 2011 Author Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>I can definitley see fine print in sharp focus at a 1 meter distance but focusing on something with less fine detail is more difficult. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_waller Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>It used to take me barely a second when I was younger but the advancing years and attendant long-sightednes meant that it took me several seconds toing and froing with the focus-ring. Recently I managed to buy a correction lens so now I can do it much faster.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_sunley Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>One thing that messes up focusing ability is astigmatism, as it distorts your view of things. If you have it, regular add on or built in adjustable diopters don't correct for it. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jose_angel Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>Probably you need to get your eyes checked. I have never had problems in the past, I liked plain matte screens, and now (I`m getting old) I`m unable to manual focus with any screen except the brightest ones, with split images or with loupes.</p> <p>I always have in my bag a red light led lamp with three diodes (the ones used for biking), that I need to use when there is not enough light or contrast; I just place the lamp in the focus plane, making things way easier. Obviously, it`s useless under certain circumstances.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricardovaste Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>I was amazed the other day. My dad has had bad eye sight for a few years now, hasn't been manually focusing or even really doing photography for about 15-20. I showed him my A900 & 58/1.2 lens and said "here, this is probably one of the best and brightest SLR viewfinders you'll ever pick up". He focused on me for about 10 seconds and took one shot, at 1.2, and talked about it for a while after. Later on I was using the camera again and came to the photo, I reviewed it on the LCD and he'd got it perfectly in focus at 1.2! Took me a while to learn how to focus well with that lens, sigh...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_henderson Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>Depends. If for examlpe I were to focus with the original fairly dim, no focus aid screen of my Bronica on a low contrast subject it could take a lot longer than that without creating the certainty that I've got it right. If I'm focussing in Live View on my Canon 5DMk11 and I use the 5x and/or 10X magnification to check the likely shapness of foreground and background objects then again it can easily take over 10seconds. If I focus my Mamiya 7 rangefinder and then after I've determined what I want to focus on and got that sharp I might want to check the distance/likely sharpmess of parts of the subject away from the point of focus, and that might take quite a time. </p> <p>But if I'm not bothering with any of these nuances, have a bright screen and only concern myself with finding focus on one object in the frame, then I'd expect to do that in a second or two. I don't have great eyesight.</p> <p>So three hypotheses. First your eyesight isn't up to it. No harm getting this checked from time to time regardless. Over the years I've seen a large number of comments on here to the effect that now that the writer is getting older they need autofocus. </p> <p>Second possibility is that you are plagued with indecision- maybe you've actually been in perfect focus a few times before you realise that this is the best you're going to do.</p> <p>Third, for whatever reason you just need more brightness and/or more focus aids to give you the reassurance you need. If you haven't got a split screen device, maybe that would help you focus more decisively- works for a lot of people including me.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russ_britt3 Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=3902476">Bob Sunley</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/2rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Jul 15, 2011; 02:15 a.m. One thing that messes up focusing ability is astigmatism, as it distorts your view of things. If you have it, regular add on or built in adjustable diopters don't correct for it.</p> <p>Well I have had my optician to cut me a corrective lens the size of a quarter. This fits perfect in the eypeace on an NC2 finder and does correct for astigmatism.<br> The great thing about shooting square is not rotating the camera, and this allows you to correct for astigmatism.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russ_britt3 Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>Oh one more thing, about two years ago I had a lot of trouble focusing all my cameras, that when I went to my doctor and he found a cataract in my right eye. When that was removed, the problem is all gone. In fact I no longer need corrective any lens in my cameras. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_scheitrowsky1 Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>How long does it take you to set up for a putt shot in golf? Sometimes one thinks too much.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henryp Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>IMO focusing is <em>A LOT</em> faster, easier and more accurate with a split image screen than with any other type. YMMV.</p> <p>Henry Posner</p> Henry Posner B&H Photo-Video Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_waller Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>Henry,<br> Yes, the split-image is another boon to the long-sighted photographer. Even the microprism wasn't much help to me. Mind you, now I have the correction lens, things are much, much better. It would be very helpful if camera manufacturers fitted a variable dioptre eyepiece as a matter of course.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_wilson1 Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>Actually, for me I prefer a plain screen, no split. I like a grid though but only have one right now. I used to focus very fast with my Bronica SQa system, but the Hasselblads slowed me down some when I switched, the lenses have more physical drag, PITA. I can still focus my ED-IF Nikkors very fast at age 51, but I don't see as well so I miss more here and there that I would have locked in before. I used to shoot a lot of sports MF so my technique is still pretty darn good to my surprise.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jens_g.r._benthien Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>Two seconds max with my <a href="http://toyotadesigner.wordpress.com/2011/07/10/fuji-6x9/">Fuji rangefinders</a>.</p> ------------------------------------------ Worry is like a rocking chair. It will give you something to do, but it won't get you anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffy_h_f. Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>It takes me minutes at best, but I am legally blind. I am faster than my guide dog, though, mainly because she does not have opposable thumbs.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blake_f Posted July 15, 2011 Author Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>I am 23 and I have not been to an eye doctor in at least 5 years but I know I have an astigmatism so maybe that is the problem? I have used rangefinders before without problem so maybe I need one of those split image screens.<br> I have an eye exam today so we will see what they say.<br> As for lining up a putt shot it probably takes me 20-40 seconds but I am not a patient or regular golfer anymore.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smooth_carrots Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>With my Yashica Electro, no time at all. I don't look through the viewfinder, just use the scale to set the necessary hyperfocal thingummybob. Fire and forget, so to speak.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhooru Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>Using a Hassleblad, it can take me several seconds to feel comfortable with a selected focus. Using a Rangefinder Mamiya 7, it's much faster.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zack_zoll Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 <p>My Hassy takes a while too, either with the WLF or a prism. There is a claim (and I can neither refute nor confirm this) that the Acute-Matte screens, while much brighter, are actually harder to focus. The theory is that based on how the glass is etched, images don't 'snap into focus' as obviously as they do on a regular screen.</p> <p>I can confirm that images don't snap into focus with my Acute-Matte screen ... but since my eyes are bad too, they never really snapped clearly into focus with my old screen either.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blake_f Posted July 16, 2011 Author Share Posted July 16, 2011 <p>I came back from the eye doctor and it turns out I have better than 20/20 vision however I do have a slight astigmatism and I am slightly far sighted so I could be the problem although it sounds like the Hassleblad just might be more difficult than other cameras to focus. Hopefully a range finder focusing screen will be easier for me to focus...if anyone has used one please share your experience.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DickArnold Posted July 16, 2011 Share Posted July 16, 2011 My eyes are not great and my far vision is blurry even with glasses.. With a proper diopter setting I see better through my lenses than than I can through my glasses. I did weddings for several years with manual focus Bronica PE lenses through a metered prism finder in which I installed a dioper fitting . It never occurred to me to worry about how long it took to manual focus. I got my pictures even when people were moving. I never noticed a difference in focusing time between accu-matte and regular screens. I have astigmatism as well. Never really bothered me as I keep my glasses on for shooting and they have corrections for that. The only time focus bothered me with the weddings is when outdoors it was 90 degrees, I was sweating and the glasses fogged up. My cure for that was f16. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zack_zoll Posted July 16, 2011 Share Posted July 16, 2011 <p>Blake, anything with a WLF can be tricky if your eyes are a little iffy. If you manually focus, and then set the focus just a hair closer, that usually solves the problem. I *suspect* that this is because your eyes are focusing on the front of the ground glass while the image is technically on the back of it, but someone with an engineering degree or a better understanding of optics can explain it. I just take pictures :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blake_f Posted July 17, 2011 Author Share Posted July 17, 2011 <p>Zack, please forgive my ignorance, I am not sure what you mean by setting the focus a hair closer.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zack_zoll Posted July 17, 2011 Share Posted July 17, 2011 <p>Blake, say your subject is five feet away. You'll focus normally so the image appears focused, and then front-focus a little, so the meter is focused slightly closer than five feet away. I find this to be very helpful; not doing it means I usually get ears in focus instead of eyes.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now