Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]You're absolutely right about the care involved in manual focusing. However, dare I question whether you're producing some soft images because your eyes aren't what they were when last you used manual focus? Get your glasses checked. And then consider a diopter for the M. I wear glasses - bifocals - and found that adding a +1 diopter, which takes the built-in -.5 to a +.5, made all the difference in the world in my focusing accuracy. Good luck. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of > drodgers@nextlink.net > Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 2:01 PM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: [Leica] Manual and Auto Focus Musings > > > > > I bought a new light board the other day. It's much brighter and > more color > corrected than the homemade board I've used for the past decade. I bought > it to reorganize 25-years of slides. While in the midst of that project, > I've learned some interesting trends. > > It appears that I was much more careful with focusing early on > ('75-'82). I > did commercial work at the time for Chevron Chemical Company. Though I > don't recall being particularly aware of focus, I'm sure I paid close > attention. Much of what I did was published in periodicals, or in the > Ortho Lawn & Garden book series, so it was carefully scritinized.. > > After 5-years away from photography I returned as an amateur. I embraced > autofocus in the late 80's. It appears that I got a bit lazy when I > returned to Manual Focus. Looking at slides from the last 10 years I can > clearly see that I haven't been as attentive to focus as I should have > been. I see lots of little errors, not surprisingly when shooting at wider > apertures. > > Ironically, I recall moving away from autofocus because I missed so many > shots. I'd lock onto a background object and the main subject would be > badly out of focus, or the camera would hunt causing annoying delays. (I > know things have come a long way since then). Also at that time AF was > changing so dramatically that new bodies were antiquated in a matter of > months. I moved back to MF -- Contax SLRs and Leica M Cameras. I have a > love/hate relationship with AF. I don't want to go back to faster battery > drain, antiquating equipment, etc. I like the feel of fine MF lenses. I > feel like I have more control, creative and otherwise. I like cameras with > bright, uncluttered viewfinders. As an amateur I can afford the fact that > MF may be a bit slower. > > I suppose I bring this up as a reminder to myself that it takes a good > deal of effort -- practice and careful attention to technique -- to make > the most of fine MF lenses. If I'm not going to put in the > effort, I may as > well just buy a Canon Rebel and 28-135 IS lens. Getting the most from fine > Leica lenses certainly is demanding of the person behind the lens. But, > when you get it right it's like fine....well, Scotch (I've been away from > the LUG for 2 months. Hope that simile hasn't run its course). However, > fine photographs are more lasting. It sure is educational reviewing old > work. > > >