Stupidest, most overpriced, most poorly executed camera in the last two years

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I took the plunge about 2 months ago and bought An EOS 60d (my 350d is
rather old and the batteries are on the blink.

Because the 60d has interchangeable focusing screen I also invested in
a Katzeye rangefinder screen. Even at my age (80) it was easy to change
and went in centrally first time.

I have an old 500mm mirror lens and could even focus that using the
main body of the focusing screen.

why not use the camera's focus confirmation?

Don't trust it.

it's more accurate than you are, and in much lower light too.

Not if I have one of the old-fashioned ground glass screens.

especially if you have one of those.

the nikon d3200 can autofocus down to ev -1 and the d4 can autofocus to
ev -2. tht's fairly typical of modern slrs although some are 1 or two
stops worse. still, that's very low light.

the lens needs a maximum aperture of f/5.6 or faster (and f/8 on some
cameras, such as the d4).

good luck focusing on ground glass in those conditions.

Don't know what it thinks it's confirming focus on.

whatever is under the selected focus point.

Which is a not insignificant area. Which part has it selected?

the focus point is not very big.

Say you are trying to photograph the head of a bird. Has it picked the
eye or the beak? Does it even care?

where was the focus point?

it's certainly not any easier with a ground glass.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

And no LCD lets you focus with the accuracy of the old ground-glass
view finders in the SLR of 15 or more years ago. Neither can a DSLR
offer the same certainty.

oh yes they can, with focus confirmation,

... confirming focus on what?

whatever you want.

No. The camera has no way of knowing what you want.

i didn't say it did.

you pick where the active focus point is.

or let the camera do the focusing, which can do a better job and faster.

... then you are relying on the camera's opinion of what needs to be
in focus.

only if you don't know what you're doing.

My point is that you don't know what the camera thinks you are trying
to do.

and my point is that you tell the camera what you are trying to do.

My D300 has the ability to play all kinds of tricks with focus and
focus points but these all take time.

depends what tricks you want it to do.

pick one focus point, put it on your subject and focus until you get
confirmation. some cameras even beep.

Say I want to focus on the wart of the end of the nose. Will the
camera do any better than focus on the face?

yes.

it's no different than putting the split-image or microprism part of a
focusing screen on your target and focusing, except for being less
accurate than had you used focus confirmation.

Depends on what you are trying to focus on. How for example does a
camera decide where to focus in
http://photoeverywhere.co.uk/britain...ees_leaves.JPG ?

put a focus point on a branch edge, you pick which one, and it focuses.

you'll probably want a smaller aperture for a wider depth of field,
since there's a bit of a range to cover.

In article 2013051714152858821-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

it's hard to focus if you keep moving the camera around, and in some
cases, it will change the focus.

On most DSLRs, including the D300s both of us use, have a little button
labeled "AF lock".

or just half-press, but that's not the issue.

In the case as stated by PeterN it is the issue, as he states above.

that's a different issue.

aiming the camera, focusing and then recomposing can cause focus errors
in some situations.

http://www.visual-vacations.com/Photography/focus-recompose_sucks.htm

http://digital-photography-school.co...e-focus-recomp
ose-method

I have never been an advocate of the focus-lock-recompose method, and
it was not mentioned until yuou introduced it.

i introduced it in the first line quoted above. i could have spelled
out focus recompose but i guess i assumed people were smarter than i
gave them credit for.

Which is a pain if your subject actually moves quickely.

My D300S has "CF" mode or constant focus, a menu setting for "Focus
tracking with lock on", "Dynamic AF area"; 3D Tracking, all of these
features have proven to be very useful for me at sporting events, motor
sport events, and air shows.

none of that will work with a manual focus lens, which was the original
issue.

Not exactly. The original issue was RichA telling us he considered the
Sony DSC RX1 an overpriced failure.(Note the subject title.)

he considers most things overpriced failures. nothing new there.

In article , PeterN
wrote:

I took the plunge about 2 months ago and bought An EOS 60d (my 350d is
rather old and the batteries are on the blink.

Because the 60d has interchangeable focusing screen I also invested in
a Katzeye rangefinder screen. Even at my age (80) it was easy to change
and went in centrally first time.

I have an old 500mm mirror lens and could even focus that using the
main body of the focusing screen.

why not use the camera's focus confirmation?

You didn't actually read , did you?

The lens is OLD and only has manual focusing. No focus confirmation in the
camera because of that.

Some cameras have focus confirmation with old lenses. noapam assumes all
cameras do. Yours obviously doesn't, but you knew that going in. Enjoy it.

i didn't say all cameras did, and that's not what he said anyway.

You said: "why not use the camera's focus confirmation?" Implicit in
that statement is that his camera has focus confirmation. Maybe it does,
maybe it doesn't. Maybe he, for some reason is unable to effectively
able to use it,even if it has the feature.

i never said all cameras had it. more lies from you.

i simply asked why not use it. if the camera doesn't have it then
that's the answer.

old lenses is not what defines whether or not there's focus
confirmation.

True.

so you agree with me, but just want to argue.

In article , PeterN
wrote:

... while all the time you are trying to frame the image as well as
focus.

it's hard to focus if you keep moving the camera around, and in some
cases, it will change the focus.

Which is a pain if your subject actually moves quickely.

that's why autofocus works better. the camera is faster than a human
and can track moving subjects, even while you fire off multiple shots.

Depends on the lens. e.g. the original Nikon 80-400. If you don't
believe me, who owned one, read the reviews. Some lenses focus faster
than others.

although the 80-400 is not that fast, the camera is still going to be
able to track a moving subject faster than you can. it only needs to
make very minor adjustments to the focus, not rack the entire focus
movement.

Your engineering skill issovaluable, that you could have made millions
of dollars, making that modification. It's a crying shame you did not
have your predictive skills a few years before Nikon came out with the
new version. Indeed since there are a lot of the old models out there,
why dont you start a modification service. I certainly would haveliked
to see such a service.

more irrelevant babble.

no modification is needed. tracking autofocus works fine with the old
80-400, as well as non afs lenses (mechanical linkage). i've done it
many times with various lenses.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

But say you are trying to take the photograph of the bird in
http://www.learningtosnap.com/thumbs/bird2HDR-1.jpg

How would you ensure that you were focussed on the eye and not the
feathers around it?

select one active focus point and put it on the eye.

On 2013-05-17 16:04:06 -0700, Eric Stevens said:

On Fri, 17 May 2013 08:39:29 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2013-05-17 03:02:12 -0700, Whisky-dave said:

On Friday, May 17, 2013 5:46:31 AM UTC+1, nospam wrote:
In article , Eric Stevens

Le Snip

it's hard to focus if you keep moving the camera around, and in some
cases, it will change the focus.

On most DSLRs, including the D300s both of us use, have a little button
labeled "AF lock".

Which is a pain if your subject actually moves quickely.

My D300S has "CF" mode or constant focus, a menu setting for "Focus
tracking with lock on", "Dynamic AF area"; 3D Tracking, all of these
features have proven to be very useful for me at sporting events, motor
sport events, and air shows.

But say you are trying to take the photograph of the bird in
http://www.learningtosnap.com/thumbs/bird2HDR-1.jpg

How would you ensure that you were focussed on the eye and not the
feathers around it?

It would probably be best to see the original, uncropped version to
answer that question. That said that bird is perched and stationary.
(Note that is an HDR shot, unnecessarily so, but a multi-exposure shot
none the less).
So I would make the assumption that the photographer is using a tripod
mounted camera with a fairly long lens. He could certainly place an AF
focus point right on that birdy's eye, I know I could. I would not be
using 3D-tracking for that shot, the bird isn't in the air flying.
Also if I was too far away to distinguish the eye I would place the AF
point on the upper body of the bird and trust my DoF. If the bird was
that far away you would not be able to do much more than focus on the
body of the bird.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2013-05-17 16:16:44 -0700, Eric Stevens said:

On Fri, 17 May 2013 09:36:05 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2013-05-17 09:14:53 -0700, PeterN said:

On 5/17/2013 11:39 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-05-17 03:02:12 -0700, Whisky-dave said:

On Friday, May 17, 2013 5:46:31 AM UTC+1, nospam wrote:
In article , Eric Stevens

Le Snip

it's hard to focus if you keep moving the camera around, and in some
cases, it will change the focus.

On most DSLRs, including the D300s both of us use, have a little button
labeled "AF lock".

Which is a pain if your subject actually moves quickely.

My D300S has "CF" mode or constant focus, a menu setting for "Focus
tracking with lock on", "Dynamic AF area"; 3D Tracking, all of these
features have proven to be very useful for me at sporting events, motor
sport events, and air shows.

I have not yet learned how to use those features, in my camera.

With the focus mode switch on the front of the D300 you can select from
"S", "M", or "C".

In the custom setting menu go to a3 Dynamic AF area and select "3D 51
points (3D-tracking).
Using this can be a bit disconcerting at first as the active FP seems
to jump all over the place especially when you are tracking or panning
with a moving target. For example at an airshow when a plane is making
a low fast pass at several 100 MPH shooting with AF "S" mode and using
a single FP, making a good, focused capture with a high shutter speed
pan is very difficult to achieve. Using AF "C" mode and 3D-tracking, as
you pan the AF point is jumping all over the tracked target, and one
might think "WTF is this damn camera doing?". What it is doing is what
is very difficult for even the best of us to do with standard settings.
It allows me to get airshow shots such as this:
http://db.tt/B1Q9fEoI

3D focussing works in that case there is only the aircraft in the
picture. How would you get on in the circumstances of
https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.n...86707623_n.jpg
(not

my photograph - this is one of the early shots after the plane
was reassembled at the Fighter Factory (Norfolk, Virginia)). Would all
the stuff in the background make it harder for the camera to keep
focussed on the aircraft?

I would use AF "C" mode + 3D-tracking. Once you have locked on to the
moving target the background is ignored.
The Mosquito is flying from right to left. The tree line the plane is
paralleling does not seem to be parallel to your position. So, with
your pan there is a target which is closing until it is directly
opposite you at its closest point. If you are using AF "S" or "M" the
AF is going to depend on your shutter release and dumb luck.
If you just select a central AF point, your skill in being able to pan
and hold the AF focus point on the fast approaching plane is going to
be tested, and dumb luck comes into play again.
If yo use AF "C" + 3D-tracking, from the moment you are able to target
the approaching plane an AF focus point will lock onto the moving plane
(the actual AF point is likely to change as you pan but it will remain
locked on) and the AF "C" will maintain focus.

....and since that isn't your shot, the photographer did a good job
panning and dumb luck worked well. However, he might well have been
using AF "C" and some sort of tracking.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 5/17/2013 7:35 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

... while all the time you are trying to frame the image as well as
focus.

it's hard to focus if you keep moving the camera around, and in some
cases, it will change the focus.

Which is a pain if your subject actually moves quickely.

that's why autofocus works better. the camera is faster than a human
and can track moving subjects, even while you fire off multiple shots.

Depends on the lens. e.g. the original Nikon 80-400. If you don't
believe me, who owned one, read the reviews. Some lenses focus faster
than others.

although the 80-400 is not that fast, the camera is still going to be
able to track a moving subject faster than you can. it only needs to
make very minor adjustments to the focus, not rack the entire focus
movement.

Your engineering skill issovaluable, that you could have made millions
of dollars, making that modification. It's a crying shame you did not
have your predictive skills a few years before Nikon came out with the
new version. Indeed since there are a lot of the old models out there,
why dont you start a modification service. I certainly would haveliked
to see such a service.

more irrelevant babble.

no modification is needed. tracking autofocus works fine with the old
80-400, as well as non afs lenses (mechanical linkage). i've done it
many times with various lenses.


I see. You have done tracking autofocus, with non-af lenses. Or, am I
nitpicking.
You do indeed have extraordinary and valuable skills. Would you like an
introduction to Arthur Morris, who has a contrary opinion, and would
love to learn your skills.
http://photography.about.com/od/famousphotographersbios/a/arthurmorrisbiography.htm


--
PeterN

On 5/17/2013 6:54 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-05-17 15:25:53 -0700, Eric Stevens said:

On Fri, 17 May 2013 00:46:31 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

And no LCD lets you focus with the accuracy of the old ground-glass
view finders in the SLR of 15 or more years ago. Neither can a DSLR
offer the same certainty.

oh yes they can, with focus confirmation,

... confirming focus on what?

whatever you want.

No. The camera has no way of knowing what you want.

focus peaking

... that might be useful but I have no experience of it.

it's very useful.

or just zooming into the image 100%, and at lower light levels too.

... while all the time you are trying to frame the image as well as
focus.

it's hard to focus if you keep moving the camera around, and in some
cases, it will change the focus.

Yep

or let the camera do the focusing, which can do a better job and
faster.

... then you are relying on the camera's opinion of what needs to be
in focus.

only if you don't know what you're doing.

My point is that you don't know what the camera thinks you are trying
to do.

My D300 has the ability to play all kinds of tricks with focus and
focus points but these all take time.

depends what tricks you want it to do.

pick one focus point, put it on your subject and focus until you get
confirmation. some cameras even beep.

Say I want to focus on the wart of the end of the nose. Will the
camera do any better than focus on the face?

it's no different than putting the split-image or microprism part of a
focusing screen on your target and focusing, except for being less
accurate than had you used focus confirmation.

Depends on what you are trying to focus on. How for example does a
camera decide where to focus in
http://photoeverywhere.co.uk/britain...ees_leaves.JPG ?

You just have to snipe through the foliage and hit your target.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...C_3618Aw-2.jpg



bow Wow!
Nicely done.

--
PeterN