RE: [Leica] AF, a FAD? Kinda!:)

["Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" <peterk@lucent.com>]

Ted,

I respect your opinion, and to answer you since you doubt me so much, the
last time was at Oakland stadium with the Yankees at opening day last month.
I am acquainted with some members Yankee media and they always help get me
in.  
The reason I pointed out AF and tracking is a question was posed to me.  If
you have 6 images that are tack sharp, you have a greater chance of having
the one that will fit your needs.  SOmetimes you can't use just the one you
really try for, editors often prefer choices and may pick one other than
your own choice.

You label something "auto focus eye syndrome", and indicate that every image
is dead
centre to use the sensor, and you know there are now 5 or more sensors
available in some machines.  I am surprised you feel that a good
photographer who knows his equipment, will miss the shot.  If you know where
the action is the sensors can track it and in focus.  Just a matter of
knowing your equipment and the benefits newer technology has.

Now, for the record, I never said the photos would be better with AF, simply
that AF like any other tool has its uses.  Since I was asked to explain this
I did.

I agree with your comment that was said at the Western Canadian News
Photographers Seminar "Before using auto focus equipment on skiing races,
I'd get one or two really nice images. But once I got the AF Canon gear I
got the whole 36 frames sharp!  None of them _BETTER PICTURES_ they were
just
sharp."  But I would think law of averages would apply although they may not
be better, your editors would have a greater selection of choice in what
they need for their publication.

>Now Peter, I think the only thing in averages are, you'd have 1 or 2 images
>in focus and that would be the extent of your technology shooting. It
>certainly wouldn't make them smashing great pictures against the Leica
>experienced guy using a 400mm who really knows what the sport is all about
>and that he is completely focused on the action and the image in the
>viewfinder.

Your comment here is undertood, but subjective.  You are moving the goal
posts as you would say.  My original e-mail only pointed out facts.

<<<<Now please tell me how you can focus track with a MF camera and be sure
you get all 6 images in focus.>>>>>>>

Well now how often do you really need all 6 images in focus and what nut
case photo editor would give you the page space for all 6? Wouldn't happen
and like I say.....YOU ONLY NEED ONE SMASHING GREAT IMAGE!"  And auto focus
doesn't guarantee that any time!

You don't. But if you miss that one image with MF what would you have?  A
wasted day.

<<<<<BTW, most AF SLRs also have high-speed rewinding so at frame 36 I will
up and running on the next roll in about 5 seconds, will you?>>>>>

Hell no lad, I'd just swing one of the other two cameras up and keep
shooting while your high-speed whining motor was trying to race me to the
end of the roll. :)  And surprise......you'd still have to reload! :)  need
I say more? :)

I was indicating one camera.  Obviously if you carry 2-3 bodies my comment
would not apply, but you knew that ;-)

Have a nice day Ted. :)

Peter K