From 20D to...?

[alfarmer]

Hi.

 

I'm finding myself very unsatisfied with my 20D's auto-focusing

capabilities because of the high degree of tolerance built into the

system (that 3x AF point size randomness). This is a problem for me

because I specifically shoot only two kinds of photography:

 

1. Macro.

2. Low or available light without flash or tripod.

 

That's it. I don't care about anything else. So after this 20D

experience, the question becomes -- can it be done at all or is this

asking the impossible with current dSLR technology?

 

I've had some people tell me I need a 1D or 1Ds, but to "expect a

learning curve". I don't know what they meant by that, but if you

could explain it I'd appreciate it. But would either of these cameras

(or even the 1DS MkII) be able to meet my needs?

 

Thanks in advance for all your sage advice...

 

Regards,

ALF

[ron_jonson]

You could always train yourself to focus manually. People still do that, don't they? For macro work, I would think that would be the preferred way to shoot even with a great autofocus system. Of course, the smallish viewfinder of DSLR's makes autofocusing a bit more difficult. So why not get a full-frame DSLR, a film camera, or some other larger format with a decent viewfinder. You have to be able to see what you're shooting.

[ky2]

1. Get a Nikon FM with their 200mm Nikkor AFD Micro, focus manually with.

 

2. Get a Leica rangefinder.

 

3. Splurge over a 1DsMk2/1DMk2. Ironically-- the 1+2 options maybe cheaper. Together.

[ron_jonson]

<i>>>>Of course, the smallish viewfinder of DSLR's makes autofocusing a bit more difficult.</i>

<br><br>

oops... obviously, I meant "manual" focusing is more difficult. Also, for low available light situations, both manual and auto focusing take a bit more skill if the light is really dim. There are things that can be done to make exact focusing less critical...like use a wider angle lens for more depth of field, use a flash, use a smaller aperture if possible (tripod, higher ISO, etc.)..... Distance to your subject also affects depth of field. The closer you are the more shallow it is and the more critical it is to get exact focus. Try working with what you have for a while and find ways to make it work for you. There's a lot of tricks that photographers can learn by "just doing" rather than just buying shiny new gear.<br><br>

That said, some of the best images I've seen are not in very good focus or are completely out of focus. Depends on what you're shooting, but don't get too hung up on the technical stuff and the equipment unless someone's paying you for a particular type of shot.

[df-gallery]

Perhaps you could use MF and a focusing aid, such as the magnifier eyepiece. For low light hand held, nothing beats a rangefinder, perhaps an Epson RD1? Either way, autofocus doesn't perform at its best when at either macro or low light. Hope it helps.

[alexdi]

If the 1 series can't AF in low light, no body will. They excel at it in ways not immediately apparent on the specification sheet.

 

A decent flash with an AF assist light will allow any body to AF perfectly nearly all the time, regardless of lighting.

 

Most macro lenses are quite poor at AF at close range. Presumably most of your macro photography is by tripod, and if you're going to futz around with that, you may as well take the time to manually focus. DOF is generally so shallow that even if AF worked, the focus point would be larger than the DOF.

 

DI

[jimstrutz]

Have you tried one of the third party viewscreens for your 20D that include a split image MF assist? Mine works great. Manual focusing a 20D is easy with this. Alternatively, go rent a 1D(s) MkII and try it out for a day to see if it's worth it to you.

 

On the other hand, I think the 20D's AF capabilities are quite good.

[panos_voudouris]

For macro you won't get very far with AF. Manual focusing is a must.

 

In low light, according to the specs, a 1D will AF better but there is still a limit to what a

passive AF sensor can do. Any of the EX speedlites with an AF assist light will help any

camera focus in any light. If you want something smaller, the ST-E2 can be used as a AF

assist for that.

[bennyboy]

For Maco work, MF and a good focus rail would be optimal I would have thought? It's something I'd certainly consider if I started to spend more time doing macro work.

[medina photography cherry]

I echo everything reported thus far. For Macro, I typically use a 25 mm ext tub on my 50mm or 70 200 lenses, sometimes I will even use a 25mm ext, 2x tele and the 70 200. I always manually focus this.

Available light. I have both the 20D and the 10D. The 20D does a much better job. Remember, when you focus on anything the cameras ability to focus is based on contrast. Try to go out and focus your camera on a white wall in daylight (smooth even white wall) your camera will hunt. But if you paint half the wall black and put your focus on the line between the two it will snap into focus. Use this same technique with low light and you should be fine. I have never had a problem, you just have to know how to use the tools.

[steve santikarn]

for macro works I use the AF to get me within the focussing range and always over-ride the AF with manual fine tuning. It's very easy to do with the Canon 100 mm macro lens, I don't know about other lens. In the dark you'll need the 580EX flash that has red focus assist light which makes AF relatively easy within the flash range.

[wickerman_wickerman1]

I saw a similar prob to this on another recent thread and i am absolutly amazed at these threads.

 

Auto-focus in my mind is relatively new and camera's gave pin sharp pic's for 100 years before auto-focus, and at the push of a switch you can overcome the prob instead of spending thousands on a new camera which will probably give you the same puzzles.

 

Infact your problem is far less complecated than changing the camera's focus zone/spot

 

I suggest you go on a photography course on how to use a camera, other than than if you are that stupid i would gladly tell you what you want to hear and relieve you of any spare cash you have.

[alexdi]

Wickerman:

 

Don't be a fool. Most DSLRs have small and dim viewfinders and no manual focus aids. It's tremendously frustrating to MF a wide aperture lens on such a body, particularly with candids or in any time-sensitive context.

 

DI

[alfarmer]

>> I suggest you go on a photography course on how to use a camera

 

Yeah, that's helpful.

 

The only thing a camera class could teach me is how to develop film -- which is no longer a necessity. How to manipulate RAW data in an automated way, however, would be most useful. I have high hopes for Apple's Aperture program.

 

I know what I'm doing with a camera and the only way I know how to solve my problem is what everyone here has suggested -- manual focus. Unfortunately, as others here have observed, MF with the 20D sucks because there's no optical assistance. I can get one of the third-party focusing screens and install it myself, but I'll void my warranty doing so.

 

 

>> other than than if you are that stupid i would gladly

>> tell you what you want to hear and relieve you of any

>> spare cash you have.

 

Deeey, duhhh, me likey pretty words. Me give you green paper for more.

 

Get a grip, dude.

 

ALF

[wickerman_wickerman1]

Of course before 15 years ago all non-autofocus cameras had the brightist of view finders and every manual focus aid under the sun didnt they?

 

Lets see my old Practica BC1 had? oh yes i remember the split optic ring that you aligned--great in low light and i think most cameras had little else in those days either-----no flashing focus point---no bleep----But somehow they managed to produce many many many many in focus sharp pics.

 

Of course in those days men were men --crime was non existant---it was all fields round here--and you could leave your key in the door and no-one would ever break into your house------that was all myth but in non- autofocus days thats all people had to align their manual focus and that is fact!

[wickerman_wickerman1]

Sorry that gets a bit confusing and i cant alter it--what i meant was the split optic was crap in low light and thats all most camera's had

[jimstrutz]

You won't void your warranty by installing a third party view screen on a 20D. If you damage your camera while installing it, that would not be covered, but the warranty for the rest of the camera is still intact. Also, if you are worried about what Canon would say if you had to send it in for repairs, just replace the orginal screen before doing so.

 

You know, if enough of us buy these third party screens, Canon will notice and probably offer them as options on future 20D class cameras. Maybe they will even become the standard screen.

[peter_nelson1]

I'm not sure I understand your reference to the "that 3x AF point size randomness". With my 20D I just use the center point.

 

Also, for all the people here waxing rhapsopdic about manual-focussing, it's worth pointing out two things -

 

1. The 20D has a small dark viewfinder and a focussing screen not exactly suited to MF.

 

2. Many people over a (ahem..) certain age, need to wear bifocals, especially progressive bifocals, and you can't manually focus accurately with those.

[jim_larson1]

As others say. . .for macro you need to ensure you are over the "minimum focus distance". I suspect MF is the answer here.

 

The "1" series cameras offer bigger, brighter viewfinders, which will definately help manual focussing.

 

One point. . . The 20D has a single high precision AF sensor (more accurate) and the "1" series have (I think) 8 high precision sensors. The "high precision" mode requires a F2.8 or faster lens. Note that the "1" series AF sensors have a smaller field of view than the 20D sensors. . .so that may also help.

[robin_sibson1]

I think it's actually seven rather than eight HP sensors in the 45-point system, Jim, but the point is still well made. Even better (assuming that the 1D series work like the 1V and 3 I used to have), the central sensor not only achieves normal precision focusing at f/8 but, less often realised, high precision focusing at f/4, which is pretty nice with all these good f/4 zooms that are now available, and may be part of the explanation for the highly regarded focusing performance of the 1DII. However, the catch with the HP sensors is that although they are cross-sensors, one axis is HP and one axis is normal; none of the sensors operate as cross-sensors at normal precision at small apertures. So if you are using a lens that is too slow for HP, you may actually be better off (in that respect if no other) with a lower-spec camera with a normal-precision cross-sensor, like the old EOS-5! I believe the 20D/5D AF system starts to address this, but unfortunately not yet with the f/4HP and f/8NP capability.

[luka1905]

Hope that I am wrong about your question but, you can't shot macro with "that 3x AF point size randomness"?