Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/11/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]someone wrote: > If the subject is children, autofocus is a godsend. Hi all. Here's how I see it. Autofocus is quick for sure, but I've found that it can't track the fast, unpredictable movements children make. For moving subjects, autofocus systems need time to acquire and track a smoothly moving subject. To get good shots of children running back and forth? Forget about moving the focal plane to catch the kids (either automatically or manually), rather, adjust the focal plane and wait 'till the child moves into it. I think a manual focus camera is best for this. If the chidren are still, then autofocus isn't needed, so manual is best again. For me, autofocus wins hands down for taking sports action shots of children running at top speed over a playing field. But even in this scenario, I'll still switch to manual for set piece free kicks, and wait for the player to run into the focal plane. Autofocus tends to loose the plot when kids make a short run up to kick a placed ball. R vs M for photographing children? Kids have smooth skin, and the microprism part of the R screen is good for that. Kids blink a lot, so the M is good in that respect. Kids move fast, so the M viewfinder is good there. If the child's face is turned away I find the M very easy to focus on their ear, and their closest eye will be in the same focal plane when their face comes round. The M is quieter, smaller, more like mum and dad's 'sure shot', which helps. An F5 with a 300 doesn't help one fade into the background! An M and a 90 gives you invisibility. Good photos of children can be treasures. Regards Rick Dykstra.