Why manual?

[jbq]

Rod - you must be driving an automatic. I drive a 6-speed manual with a good engine, gearbox and clutch. I get terribly frustrated with an automatic transmission, because it doesn't read my mind, it feels imprecise, unconnected, and most automatic transmissions are the car equivalent of a camera that doesn't have any useful manual setting ("yes, stupid car, the road is icy, and I really want to by driving in 3rd gear")

 

I agree that there's no substitute for a "real" manual camera. I have an EF-M (the closest equivalent to a manual camera for guys like me who are "stuck" with EOS lenses), and there are definitely situations where it "just plain better".

[Spearhead]

I take the same photos with a manual camera (I even have one that requires manually operating the shutter with the fingers) that I do with an automatic camera. It's about seeing, not what you use.

[ky2]

Because I prefer my camera to be an extension to my body, rather than a second brain...

[Spearhead]

Unless you have a point-and-shoot, what decisions does a camera make that you can't? Get real. Photographers use the cameras and make it do what they want.

[jake_tauber]

I want to make the picture I want. Not the one the camera wants.

[jsbc]

It makes no difference to me.

 

However, there is one instance where I would use automation - no questions asked - TTL for bounced flash. I'm too lazy to do the calculations (although straight manual flash is OK).

 

Some good cameras do not have automation anyway - SWC etc.

[Spearhead]

<i>Not the one the camera wants.</i><p>

 

It's an inanimate object. Anthorpormophizing it doesn't make sense. I've never had a camera make any decision for me. However, if you really think there's a way, tell me how and I'll give it the keys to the car and send it out on its own.

[kelly_flanigan1]

Maybe we started with manuals cameras in the 1950's; and it is real not a bid deal to set the aperture and shutter speed. Mayeb we want toe total control; and not some spoon fed look up table's best guess.. Others MUST have a automatic transmission; and believe a clutch should not be in a sports car.

[Spearhead]

What, none of you understand how to set "manual" on a camera? You're that impaired that you can't figure that out? What camera doesn't have a manual setting?

 

And why do most people I meet who are fanatical about manual settings take the meter setting and transfer it directly to the camera with no intermediate thought?

[ShunCheung]

Sorry to pick on my friend Yaron again. :-) Remember that a couple of days ago, he and I got together to shoot the <A HREF="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=008ANf">full moon</A>.

<P>

We met at a near-by park at 9:30pm. I brought my D100 and one lens: a 500mm/f4 AF-S plus a TC-14E and a tripod. He brought his FM3A and a wide angle just to keep the front of his camera body covered. The good thing is that the 500mm AF-S is fully compatible with both bodies.

<P>

I got there early and set my D100 to the all-manual M mode. Since the viewfinder of the D100 is illuminated, I had no trouble seeing the aperture and shutter speed inside the viewfinder and setting them on the command and sub-command dials on the body. I chose spot metering, set exposure to +1 for the bright moon and fired a few shots. I checked the LCD screen and thought my shots were over-exposed, so I changed from +1 to 0 and took a few more shots.

<P>

Now it was Yaron's turn. However, neither one of us had a flash light with us. In the dark, he had a hard time seeing the matching needles in his viewfinder as well as the shutter speed dial. We also had to set the aperture by touch, one click below wide open at f4. Eventually, he asked about the exposure I used to get my good shots and set his exposure accordingly. And to help him see in the dark to set his FM3a, I switched on the LCD on the back of my D100 and used it as a "flash light."

<P>

Keep in mind that I started with Nikon MF way back in 1977 and still own an FE from that era, but this little shootout reminds me why I abandoned MF well over a decade ago. In fact, I am on the verge to abandon 35mm film altogether. My D100 served as the "meter" and helped to illuminate the FM3A. And of course, 15 minutes after I had gotten home, my image was already up in the Nikon Forum.

<P>

Sorry to rain on your parade, but you guys are getting carried away. It is time for a little reality check. If you prefer MF, that is fine and I can see MF is better in certain situations, but there are good reasons that the world had moved on a long time ago.

[titrisol]

I like manual.. it's more fun than auto

 

There are extreme cases in which the auto-auto helps, speed photo, the full moon, etc.

But for me as an amateur a manual is a bood way to go.

Im happy with it and I feel I have control, even to have my pjhotos in not-so-perfect focus

[olivier_reichenbach]

There are lots of manual-auto combinations, what with focus, metering, even film

advance... Many people, like me, prefer manual cameras first because they are usually

smaller, and, being of older vintage, better built. We also like manual lenses for the same

reasons.

 

But mostly, I prefer manual because it makes me take my time and reflect while I'm

composing and shooting. Also, because a camera is supposed to be «just a tool» does not

mean you

don't develop a relationship with this particular tool. Ask any craftsman. A manual camera

offers me a better development of this relationship. Head, eye, hands and heart integrate

in one creative act.

 

Not that I don't like my F5. In certain circumstances it's hard to beat. But my F2 or F3 in

manual (and my Leica M2) bear the brunt of my humble shooting.

 

There are many writers who still prefer to handwrite, some even using lead pencils. Others

swear by their 60s typewriter. Others need the latest computer and software.

[rod_sainty2]

Hang on, Shun, you say you needed autofocus for the MOON?? And the D100 was better because it was able to double as a TORCH!! Why didn't you just open the door of the car and use the courtesy light or use your headlights momentarily to see the shutter dial of the FM3A, then just bracket a few shots based on the sunny 16 come 22 rule (It's sunny on the moon). Sheesh!!

 

And Jeff, sure we can find the manual mode, and eventually figure out which unmarked dial changes shutter speed or aperture by reference to an LCD, but by then the fleeting moment has gone. And where are the DOF scales on an autofocus lens? It is far faster and immediate to just turn a marked and detented shutter speed dial and a marked and detented aperture ring which are very different in style and location and logically placed. And use the DOF scales to get everything in focus when that's necessary. And be able to see what you have set on the camera without switching the camera on! I routinely deviate from the meter recommendations for the different films I use according to what light I am in. Simple for a manual camera, not so (in my experience) on auto cameras. It's as if car makers started putting the steering wheel in the middle of the car and the brake pedal over on the passenger side and said to their customers: "We thought you'd like it better this way."

 

But no matter what we say, we'll just be labelled as "old fuddies"! I accept that.

 

Cheers, Rod

[ShunCheung]

Rod, when did I say I needed AF to shoot the moon? And what makes you think that we had a car? Yaron and I are neighbors and we walked separately to the park, where no cars are allowed in the middle of it anyway. I was simply surprised how handicapped the FM3a is when we are shooting in the dark. Actually, I shouldn't be surprised because for years I used an FE and FE2, and the FM3a isn't all that different from those cameras. But I have been spoiled by modern electronic cameras where all sorts of information (aperture, shutter speed, exposure compensation, etc.) are convenintly available inside the viewfinder LCD which is illuminated.

[moccia]

I prefer manual focus camera bodies and lenses because they are solid, last a lifetime and they can be easily repaired.

Therefore the equipment cost is negligible. And film is not so expensive if you shot deliberately.

Classic design and products built to last are not loved by any industry. Too much value for the customers.

Garbage design, helped by marketing hype `the newest the better`, has been the industry mainstream response. It happened in all the sectors. It`s part of our stressed up consumerist life.

You can accept it passively like the majority do. Or you can elaborate a more selective and responsible buying strategy. I try to do that for any purchase. Manual camera is just part of a lifestyle which include (for me) organic food (we prepare or own meals, no junk food), minimizing the use of car, books instead than TV, etc..

[jake_tauber]

Jeff,

 

"What the camera wants." Just a figure/or phrase of speech. But, it seems as if many photographers don't want to have to think when taking a picture. Then, when they see the result they wonder what went wrong.

 

In seeing your terrific work, it's clear you leave little to "automation". Or at the very least, you're controling it to give the result you had in mind.

 

BTW, given the amount of "fondling" in the world of high-end cameras, I sure there is way too much anthropomorphization going on. I never want to hear you call your camera "honey" again. :>)

[john_carter_rhodes]

Jeff, why do you find it impossible to join in a discussion without insulting everyone? Please stay out if you can't be play nice.

[ky2]

<p><i>"I was simply surprised how handicapped the Fm3a is when we are shooting in the dark..."</i>-- Well Shun, you're right-- but it's not handicapped, it's just really-really (x2) hard to read the meter in complete darkness... I do wish the Fm3a had a lit viewfinder (there goes the battery!) -- the new AF bodies have it much easier with their illuminated LCD displays; However, I can focus faster than any AF camera out there in dim indoor light with my 35/1.4 :)</p>

[ky2]

And Jeff -- I understand what you're stating, it's all very rational and totally correct. But I (naturally, this is very subjective, but I believe it happens to so many others) am a spoiled brat: Whenever I have an AF-MultiSpot-Matrix-Do-It-All-Camera in my hands, I use that mode. And quite frankly, it works. 95% of the time it works. And then I get: (a) 95% of my photos end up having the same look, and (b) the other 5% are crap.

[jake_tauber]

John,

 

Although he is fully capable of defending himself, Jeff is generally one of the most helpful guys participating on PN. Like me, he doesn't suffer fools gladly. Anyway, I'll happily accept his very rare irascible comment to hear his frequent informed opinions and advice.

[rod_sainty2]

Shun, sorry, you're right, I did read too much into your response: "but this little shootout reminds me why I abandoned MF well over a decade ago.." I got a bit carried away! :) Please accept my apology and contrition. I also accept that a fully illuminated viewfinder is useful on some occasions.

 

I just expected that the full moon you were photographing would have provided sufficient light to read a shutter speed dial. No matter.

 

By the way, the FE is not a manual camera - it's an aperture-preferred auto camera with manual focus. It always felt backward to me in use - turn the aperture ring and watch the shutter speed change in the viewfinder. (I know what it's showing). In hand-held situations it seemed more work than a manual camera because you had to turn the aperture ring to achieve a shutter speed fast enough to avoid camera shake blur, forcing one to consider both aperture and shutter speed at the same time. With the manual FM you just preset the shutter speed to avoid camera shake blur and at the moment of shooting only need concern yourself with aperture.

 

I agree with you that the D100 is a preferable camera to the FE, but classic manual cameras like the FM, FM2N and FM3A are simply very clean and elegant in use and permit the control that is needed to turn the visualisation into a successful photograph without fuss. That's why I like mine.

[ist_petit]

Both auto and manual camera have their own strengths and weeknesses.Shun's just compared auto's strong point with manual's week one.Now what about it if I hold FM2N day long in raining and it still works,then you try your DSLR in the same condition?

 

Cheers

 

ist

[titrisol]

Some people like me (demented probably) stil prefer to fuss with focus, exposure, aperture with old cameras. Pictures from this manual beats are as good as modern equipment pictures. It's all in the photographer more than in the camera.

 

I have a FE and a N2000 here, used to have a FE-2 (stolen) and a Pentax Spotmatic (it is a few thousands miles away). Some of the best pics I ever took were with the spotty.

 

Oh I forgot, another reason I prefer manual focus/manual exposure cameras is just the beatiful sound of the shutter.

[hique]

"Can you really get more, better pix by turning dials"

 

I believe so.

 

"The really good shots I get when I'm in control are better than those produced on auto"

 

So there you have your own answer.

 

I think it has to do with the fact that we are suppose to understand what we want better than the camera.

 

I have an auto everything camera that I only use on Manual mode most of the time with manual focus. Now I have a manual camera I bought because of the battery independence, as someone pointed.

 

I believe that auto-everything cameras are only mandatory in sport photography.

[johnny_pang1]

Joe,

For me, manuel camera can help myself to slow down to think and plan before I take the pictures. If you have done this mental process in your head, it doesn't matter to use auto or manuel camera.