Why manual focus?

[witolda_maruszewska]

frame 10<div></div>

[witolda_maruszewska]

frame 11<div></div>

[witolda_maruszewska]

Verge got out OK, albeit a little shaken... I think AF proved its worth there, though the weather didn't help at the time. The exposures are not flat - it really was that misty at the back of the circuit. A few laps later, the fog had burnt off.

 

Off on another tangent, I will agree that AF on point and shoot cameras drive me to frustration as there is no real means of controlling what the camera is locking on to. At least with an SLR and the direct viewfinder, you can quite literally see what you are doing, and along with being able to select the focus points or focus lock and recompose, you have a sufficient degree of control with the AF to get things right.

[Spearhead]

<i>Although I respect your opinions generally, I reckon that in this case you are shooting from the lip Jeff.</i><p>

 

What's the difference between prefocus using AF and prefocus manually? You find a spot, focus on it. It can be done with either.

[f1-fanatic]

Hi Scott,

 

I am a little confused... You mention coming to AF with 20+ years experience shooting MF and also mention shooting with both the 1V and 1D bodies for the vast majority of your work. However, when I go to look at examples of your work to see how much, in your words, I am "handicapping" myself by using a 10D to shoot F1 I see not one photo. Would you mind sharing some of your work from your 20+ years experience with us so we could see how much we are crippled by the quality of the 10D and it?s inferiority to that of the Canon flagships?

 

-Norman

[scott_ferris]

Norman don't be so cynical!

 

What is it that you don't believe, that I bought my first good camera, a Canon AE1 in 1978

(I still have it and the original receipt) and that was after a couple of good years with a

polaroid, try taking action shots with one of those, I did, or that I now have some pro

grade kit ? Or that the 1

series AF is better than the 10D's ?

 

I ask because I need to know if I am supposed to prove that I take photos or if the 1 series

AF is better than the 10D's. If it is the latter go to, sportshooter.com, you will not see any

pictures taken by me but you will see a lot of 1D credits and very few, if any, 10D credits,

or go to Canonusa.com, again none of my pictures but a lot of technical info. If it is the

former I am sure there is nothing I can post that won't disapoint you, I only have a $150

scanner so am reluctant to post film based work and that has been my medium for the

vast majority of my work, and the bulk of it is in the UK anyway and I am in the Caribbean,

also it is very difficult to say the AF of the 10D "could not have taken this picture" but

judgeing from your F1 experiances there are many occasions when it is an accurate

statment. Also the only "sport" of any photographic interest here is surfing, that is usualy

done in good light and does not present too much of a challenge for AF or MF, I have a

particular MF shot taken on an F1 N and 300 f2.8 + 2xTC of a surfer and you can tell the

time by looking through a loupe at his watch.

 

Also you doubt my experiance, but your opinion is based on very little camera time, why

do you think you should be able to buy a $1000 body and shoot pro grade F1 shots after a

few months back following a 17 year layoff? Judgeing by your F1 folder I think your

panning technique is as much in question as your AF.

 

Anyway, here is a surf shot, nothing too taxing (for the photographer anyway) but a nice

pic that I took the day after getting my 1D, it is shot with a 300mm f2.8 IS and 2xTC mkII

(effective focal length 780mm) tripod mounted, AI Servo AF. The particular reason I like

this as an example is because I took it with a broken ankle, knee, hip, shoulder and

shattered elbow (over 10 breaks in the elbow alone), now whilst a 10D might have been

able to shoot this picture a 1D did and I could not have done it (at the time) in MF. I also

made several sales from this session.

 

Take care, Scott.<div></div>

[scott_ferris]

Sorry, forgot to mention my motorsport credentials. I grew up a couple of miles away from

Goodwood car track and spend about 20 hours a weekend there (and many many week

days aswell in the summer) it was a popular test track at the time, John Watson, David

Purley and Derek Bell lived within a few miles, it cost nothing to get in the pits and F1 cars

aswell as factory endurance cars used to test there all the time. I got some great shots of

Stephan Johansen comming into the pits with his unraced F1 turbo on fire, I was about 10

feet from him! Don't ask where they are now God only knows!

 

Take care, Scott.

[erin.e]

Here's a surfing one from Ricardo Maui, a Hawaii based photographer, using a D30, which reputedly had very slow AF. Proves once again that it ain't the size (or specs) of the tool that counts, its the skill of the operator!<div></div>

[scott_ferris]

Hi Erin,

 

I don't understand, you have said sports shooting is like shooting fish in barrels and also it

aint the tools or specs but the photographer, which is it.

 

I haven't said you can't take a good picture with a 10D or MF, but if you use the top spec

AF systems then they are very good, that sounds like a different version of your shooting

fish in barrels to me. Now if surf boy had had the opertunity which camera do you think he

would have picked up to go to the beach with between the D30 and the 1D MkII, given the

choice I would have gone with the latter and I think most sane people would, not only

because it is a faster responding and better camera but because that means he is more

likely to get the shot that pays the morgage. If I had the choice between a D30 and my

F1N, I'd take the F1N because I know how well the focusing works on that.

 

As I said another surf pic proves nothing, I have hundreds like those taken with MF, some

photographers are better than others, I agree with that, some AF systems work better than

others, you agree with that, if you are finding your AF is letting you down and you are

useing a camera that does not have the best AF then you are handicaping yourself, that is

not an opinion but a trueism, that is what handicaping means. Pro spec AF now, works

very well and I use it extensively.

 

Take care, Scott.

[erin.e]

I ain't finding my AF on the 10D is letting me down or handicapping me in any way, it works just fine thank you.

 

Ricardo, or "Surf Boy" as you disparagingly referred to him, is now using a 20D and is finding the AF on that plenty fast enough to do the job for him and his clientle.

 

Not every one can afford the price of a 1d MK11 as a working body and many working pros purchase two 10 or 20Ds as the basis of their working kit and do very well with them to.

 

A good portion of the shooters at the Sportshooter site are using company purchased gear. A minor section are high end freelancers. Me, I am a freelance editorial photographer, with a 10D and a D60 backup.

 

None of my clients or picture editors have said my selects are inferior or asked what camera and lense's I use, They just give me new assignments based on my previous work.

 

The 10D AF is faster than an EOS 1 and about the same speed as an EOS1n. The 1 and the 1n were the pro Canons 10 years ago and captured plenty of nice images for PJs and Sports Photogs and were the leading cameras of that era. No one moaned about being handicapped by having one of them.

 

The 20D AF is faster than any aforementioned camera other than the 1D mk11 and is only slightly inferior to that camera in AF lock on time and tracking speed. Build standard of course is another story.

 

A good workman never blames his tools, he just keeps the ones he has in top working conditon, and they perfom better for him than the poor workman with the latest kit

[scott_ferris]

Hi Erin,

 

So what is your point ?

 

I said surfing does not tax any AF system or any reasonably confident MFer. If people

could afford 1D MkII's do you think they'd buy them, cos believe me the ones that can do,

I'm not useing company purchased gear all my gear payed for itself, this amounts to over

$15,000 in AF alone so what, it does not change the fact that if you are in marginal AF

situations then the top performing AF systems are the ones to get the shot. If the company

thought it would get the same results with cheaper gear do you think they would ? Pro

camera gear is cost effective to pros because of its abilities and durability.

 

Ricardo is now useing a better AF camera with other benefits aswell, but if the only

improvment was that the AF was better than the D30 (damn MF is better than the D30) do

you think he would be useing one now? I bet he would, and when he can afford the 1D

MkII I'll bet he gets it. This all just proves my point and that was that AF is very good, even

in prosumer grade cameras, but in pro grade cameras it is even better.

 

Freelance editorial photogs are the worst paid professionals in the world after nurses, the

last editorial shot I sold (last week) netted the grand sum of $15.

 

Alot of pros did not use the AF in the early years because it was not good enough, they

were MFing, the AF could not track well enough in servo mode.

 

In genaral, clients don't care what gear you use just so long as you deliver, if you use the

best AF you will deliver AF critical shots more often, if you are not shooting AF critical

shots then it will make no difference.

 

What is your argument with that?

 

Take care, Scott.

[f1-fanatic]

Hi Scott,

 

There is no reason to be so defensive. You made the statement that you have over 20+ years shooting MF and that you decided not to handicap yourself by choosing a 10D but rather ?use 1V's and 1D's, for the vast majority of situations they focus and track far better than most people can?, including you. Well, when I decided to see how superior the cameras you were using were I saw nothing? So I don?t think it was out of line to simply question where the images were.

 

You say I am cynical?. Well, I am. Not of your abilities, but of your ability to tell something believable. You mention shooting the ?vast majority? of your work with the 1V?s and the 1D?s? but when asked to post something you reply with a somewhat weak answer of ?I only have a $150 scanner so am reluctant to post film based work and that has been my medium for the vast majority of my work, and the bulk of it is in the UK anyway and I am in the Caribbean?. Well what is the truth here Scott??? You mention in your own words possessing a 1D? That is a digital body is it not? So where does the scanner come into the picture??? What relevance does it have on your ?digital? work?

 

So if anything should be questioned it is your ability to get the story right as to what you indeed shoot with. You knock my ability not only as a consumer and the choices I and many other ?hobbyists? have made, but also my abilities to take photos?. Funny thing is I have spent many years at both Goodwood and Silverstone? Montreal, and Indianapolis? too. I just decided this time around to buy a camera and have some fun taking pictures for my own enjoyment not for yours or anyone else?s. I am not professing to be an expert at anything and never said I was anything more than I am? A beginner. If my photos speak of inexperience to you? well that is the truth. I haven?t been shooting all of my life. I just got back into it and have been taking the advice of others who have come before me so I can get better at my new hobby. You are entitled to your opinion and I respect that. But keep in mind I never had to make up stories of having a ?broken ankle, knee, hip, shoulder and shattered elbow (over 10 breaks in the elbow alone)? to get the point across about how I took a picture.

 

Edward H., asked a question and I simply added my point of view to shed some light as to what has worked for me. Simple as that? You, however, came in and started knocking everyone about his or her limitations, and abilities?. So I am sure you can understand why I might appear a little cynical. As for my panning technique, the photos in my F1 folder are the first of what I hope to be many attempts at shooting the sport? You might not like them, but that?s okay. In fact if you go to Anthony Davidson?s official site you will see some of my shots there, all taken with the 10D! Apparently someone liked them. But then again I am a beginner so maybe in a few years my shots will make it to other F1 drivers too? time is all it takes. Oh, almost forgot, in the short 11 or so months that I have been shooting I have also sold some of my work as well. If you need me I will be on my way to the bank laughing with my ?handicapping? 10D.

 

www.anthonydavidson.info (look under the photo link and then under 2004 Canadian GP)

 

-Norman the cripple

[erin.e]

My editorial rate is $90 per hour, plus mileage and digital folder charges Scott, so your $15 would be ten minutes of my time, thank you, enough time to gas up my car, or email a client to say "Yes, I can do that!"

 

The average job in my locality is 1/2 day rate, (4hrs) or $400-00 including digital folder charge, mileage on top. Out of town jobs are the day rate, $720-00 per day plus incurred expense's.

 

The New Zealand rate for an image,to a newspaper, non breaking news, use general news is $150-00.

 

The use of an image for advertising or promotional purpose's in my case starts at $300-00 depending on how it is used.

 

I have had some years previous experience as a press photographer, general news and sport, and have used all the cameras mentioned above with the exception of the 1D MK11.

 

I just don't need a bloody great heavy machine gun camera to do my job. My skill levels are at such a stage that the 10D and maybe a 20d to replace my D60, are quite sufficent, thank you

 

What applies to you Scott, is not nessesariliy applicable to everone else.<div></div>

[scott_ferris]

Hi Norman,

 

You are calling me a liar. Thats not very nice, it is the season of goodwill you know. I don't

understand why my original post has lead to this but as always I can back up all I say, I

don't make up stories.

 

What is the disagreement? 1 series bodies have more advanced AF than 10D's, you said

you were dissapointed with your cameras AF performance at the Canadian GP, most of the

pros there were useing AF, they got the shots and they did it on top flight Canon and

Nikon kit.

 

Anyway I wouldn't normally be so self indulgent but you have forced me to prove the

things I've said. Here goes. There follows (hopefully) a series of 5 pictures going some way

towards proving my point and showing you Norman to be an insulting idiot.<div></div>

[scott_ferris]

This one shows the bulk of my AF kit. Incuding 2x 1VHS, 1D, 16-35 f2.8L, 24-70 f2.8L, 50

f1.4, 70-200 f2.8 L IS, 300mm f2.8 L IS, 2x 550EX can't remember what else is in there

but you get the gist.<div></div>

[scott_ferris]

This one shows the metalwork that was taken out of my arm last Thursday. It includes 3

pins one L shaped plate and 9 screws.<div></div>

[scott_ferris]

This one shows my $150 scanner, my sister got it for me for Christmas last year, I don't

use it much!<div></div>

[scott_ferris]

This one shows this years slides. When my girlfriend goes to the UK on vacation in January

these will go with her. Not sure how mant films cos I havent collated them all what with

one broken bone and another, but there is in the region of 200 films. This does not

include any wedding negs, I sell them as part of the package.

 

Take care and happy Christmas, Scott.<div></div>

[f1-fanatic]

Scott,

 

Okay. So you were injured... You have a very professional kit... and the lighting of you photos is poor. What does any of this have to do with the fact that you are crying out for attention here? The subject was if I recall "Why manual focus?" not "how many pounds of steel was taken out of your body" or "show us your rig".

 

Were you not held enough as a child? The real insult is you posting your dribble here about what kit is better and how we who have chosen to use the 10D are handicapping ourselves in comparison to those with faster technology. Let me tell you this Scott... there were a lot of impressive images taken even before AF and granted those artists I am sure eventually moved forward as the technology evolved but should the fact that the images were taken with older technology diminish the final product? It's what is done and created that matters most in my honest opinion. You have decided to become defensive, and attack those responding to this post.. not I. I simply responded to you inconsistencies in your posts and if you find that insulting, maybe you need to grow a thicker skin and in general not bash others who you must feel are below you in some way for the equipment they use.

 

I do not believe anyone would compare the 10D to the 1D series as they are not even in the same class... We know the 1D is a pro series body... That is not the argument. The original poster was simply asking why someone would choose MF when AF technology is available. My suggestion is to look at the title of threads and respond to the original poster and not those who have already offered their point of view that I am sure you can agree they are indeed entitled to. You insulted people by clouding the real issue by professing how far superior the pro series bodies are, how many bones you broke, how much you scanner cost, etc.

 

It may be me, but it appears that your real hobby is debating on photography forums rather than actually taking photographs with the cameras you own.

 

Merry X-Mas,

 

Norman

[scott_ferris]

Dear Norman,

 

Please accept my apoligies for calling you an insulting idiot, I grossly underestimated you,

I should have said graceless argumentative insulting and obtuse idiot.

 

Take care, Scott.

[f1-fanatic]

Scott,

 

I don't know about you, but if I was in the Islands with my camera (yes the 10D you dolt) I would have better things to do than troll around the forums looking people to pick fights with.

 

When you can form a coherent thought about something sensible and on topic please let us all know because the more you type the less people think of you. (if that is at all possible)

 

Huggs and kisses,

-Norman