First "true" digital rangefinder camera

On Mon, 02 Mar 2015 21:09:06 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

There are occasions when the focus mechanism works with an area larger
than the area which is the key point of the photograph. Please don't
tell me that live view will deal with that. It generally won't.

there are edge cases in everything.

a split-prism won't work in every situation either, and actually it
will work in fewer situations than live view does.

The number of cases depends on the kind of photography you wish to
undertake. The split prism (or similar) will enable me to do things
that neither autofocus or an EVF can do for me.

nowhere near as much as you think. learn how to use the new technology.
it's better and more capable.

Here is an easy example. Cropped from a D300 image, 70~200mm lens at
200mm, focussed at 7.08m, f/5.6, 1/800, hand held.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/31088803/Pigeon%203.jpg

i already said that handheld is not an ideal situation for live view.

I never had time to get out and set up a tripod. As it was, I was
lucky I hadtime to change lenses.

I wanted to focus on the pigeon's eye. Where within all the
surrounding foliage do you think the camera wanted to focus?
I can't remember but I do remember I had to finish focussing with a
manual adjustment.

learn how to use the autofocus system properly.

pick a point and put it on the bird. it will focus faster and more
accurately than you could, regardless of screen.

The D300 (as I used then) does not focus on points. Nor does the D750
or anything else I know of.

you can also use manual focus with focus confirmation, which is also
more accurate and easier to use than a split-prism, however, it's not
as fast as autofocus and you won't be able to track moving subjects as
well as it can.

I've often been confronted with a similar problem with
macrophotography and wished I could be more certain I had achieved the
exact focus that I had wanted.

you can do that with live view, where you can zoom to the pixel level,
as well as use an external and much larger display.

I would be more likely to believe you know what you are talking about
if you can convince me with examples of your own photographs.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2015-02-28 19:54:40 +0000, Alfred Molon said:

In article , Oregonian Haruspex says...
It's pretty clear that in order to add autofocus, they'd have to use
some solution such as that which the Contax AX used. Move the sensor
in the body.

No need to move the sensor in the body.

The other solution would be to move the lens mount in and out, which
would be functionally the same but with the disadvantage of having
external motion.

Remember this thing is a Leica M mount camera, and M lenses are not autofocus.

I suppose they could come up with a Nikon-style kludge for their lens
mount though.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I wanted to focus on the pigeon's eye. Where within all the
surrounding foliage do you think the camera wanted to focus?
I can't remember but I do remember I had to finish focussing with a
manual adjustment.

learn how to use the autofocus system properly.

pick a point and put it on the bird. it will focus faster and more
accurately than you could, regardless of screen.

The D300 (as I used then) does not focus on points. Nor does the D750
or anything else I know of.

nonsense. of course they do.

as the saying goes: rtfm.

you can also use manual focus with focus confirmation, which is also
more accurate and easier to use than a split-prism, however, it's not
as fast as autofocus and you won't be able to track moving subjects as
well as it can.

I've often been confronted with a similar problem with
macrophotography and wished I could be more certain I had achieved the
exact focus that I had wanted.

you can do that with live view, where you can zoom to the pixel level,
as well as use an external and much larger display.

I would be more likely to believe you know what you are talking about
if you can convince me with examples of your own photographs.

how would you know how i focused? you wouldn't.

in other words, it won't make a difference one way or the other.

just another straw man of yours.

On 3/03/2015 7:59 p.m., nospam wrote:
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I wanted to focus on the pigeon's eye. Where within all the
surrounding foliage do you think the camera wanted to focus?
I can't remember but I do remember I had to finish focussing with a
manual adjustment.

learn how to use the autofocus system properly.

pick a point and put it on the bird. it will focus faster and more
accurately than you could, regardless of screen.

The D300 (as I used then) does not focus on points. Nor does the D750
or anything else I know of.

nonsense. of course they do.

as the saying goes: rtfm.

The AF system does not focus on "points".
It focuses on an "area" hopefully roughly the same as the area marked by
the AF brackets on the VF screen.

On Tue, 03 Mar 2015 01:59:54 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I wanted to focus on the pigeon's eye. Where within all the
surrounding foliage do you think the camera wanted to focus?
I can't remember but I do remember I had to finish focussing with a
manual adjustment.

learn how to use the autofocus system properly.

pick a point and put it on the bird. it will focus faster and more
accurately than you could, regardless of screen.

The D300 (as I used then) does not focus on points. Nor does the D750
or anything else I know of.

nonsense. of course they do.

as the saying goes: rtfm.

As it happens, I have the manual for the D750 at my left hand. I can
assure you that throughout the manual the text refers to the 51
rectangular focus areas as focus points. If you believe the manual the
focus points are rectangular. In fact some are cross-shaped and others
are rectangular. As is so often the case you are skimming over the
surface of things without asking yourself what it is that actually
lies underneath.

you can also use manual focus with focus confirmation, which is also
more accurate and easier to use than a split-prism, however, it's not
as fast as autofocus and you won't be able to track moving subjects as
well as it can.

I've often been confronted with a similar problem with
macrophotography and wished I could be more certain I had achieved the
exact focus that I had wanted.

you can do that with live view, where you can zoom to the pixel level,
as well as use an external and much larger display.

I would be more likely to believe you know what you are talking about
if you can convince me with examples of your own photographs.

how would you know how i focused? you wouldn't.

I know how you focus in exactly the same way you know how I focus.

in other words, it won't make a difference one way or the other.

just another straw man of yours.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , nospam wrote:

Sandman:
That would indeed be unergonomic to me, and didn't even adress the
thumb issue.

maybe to you but not to ui/ux designers who know what makes
something ergonomic and what doesn't.

Haha

Sandman:
I've never ever owned a camera that shoots in f/8.222
when in shutter priority.

nospam:
bull****. they all do. automatic is free to pick *anything* and
not be restricted to 1/2 or 1/3 stop increments.

Sandman:
So they shoot in f/8.222 but record f/8 in the EXIF? So how do you
know what aperture it "really" used?

i've seen non-standard f/stops in images.

You said "they all do", so it should be in all images, yet I can't see it any
images from Nikon D70, D80, D800E, D3s, D4 or Sony A6000, A7 and RX1R. So maybe
you need to support this claim, even though it is unrelated to your original
claim.

Sandman:
Also, you're describing an automatic setting, not
higher accuracy due to the control input.

nospam:
doesn't matter.

Sandman:
It does to the topic being discussed - i.e. the accuracy of the
aperture ring vs. the accuracy of the thumb wheel, both manual
controls.

you can't get the accuracy with a ring. it's that simple.

You just can't show how one is more accurate than the other. So more hot air.

nospam:
a control wheel fixes all of those shortcomings.

Sandman:
Well, some of them at least.

nospam:
all of them

Sandman:
In your highly personal opinion, which I for obvious
reason doesn't agree with 100%.

nospam:
it's not opinion. the issues i described are all fixed with a
control wheel.

Sandman:
Yes, I know you think so, I have given you several occasions when
they don't. So it's your opinion. You are free to it.

it's not an opinion. it can be demonstrated in objective tests.

As has been shown, this is false.

there will always be edge cases, but that doesn't change anything.

Indeed it does. "All of them" does not allow for edge cases.

--
Sandman

In article , nospam wrote:

Eric Stevens:
I had that 12 years ago in the old Sony F707 and I didn't
like it. You could either see the whole frame or you could
see whether or not it was in focus. You couldn't do both
at the same time.

nospam:
a lot has changed since then.

Sandman:
Not by much in this aspect, though.

nospam:
yes in this aspect. significant changes have occurred since the
f707 in just about every regard, which came out about 15 years
ago.

Sandman:
Not by much in this aspect, no.

yes in this aspect.

No.

the lcd on that thing sucks in comparison to
what's available today.

Not by much, no.

Sandman:
Even the latest and greatest LCD screens and EVF
still allow for either framing or focusing, you can't do both
at the same time and expect perfect focusing.

nospam:
the issue was whether live view is more accurate than a split
prism, not zooming or framing.

Sandman:
You misunderstood. With the LCD or an EVF, you must choose whether
you want to view the full scene for framing your shot or if you
want to focus the shot, which requires zooming the LCD.

you're the one who misunderstood.

Incorrect.

Sandman:
Plus, most SLR's have pretty poor LCD's, at least
when compared to high end mirrorless, but even with the
mirrorless cameras,

nospam:
nonsense. the better slrs have very good lcd displays and were
among the first to have them.

Sandman:
No, they all have really crappy LCD's for using as viewfinders.

no, they don't all have really crappy lcds.

Yes, they do.

nikon started using 900k dot displays long ago and is now using
1200k dot displays. they're *very* good.

Not for focusing they're not, hence the need to zoom it.

some evfs are also extremely good.

The one on the A7 is one of the very best, yet it is nowhere near the fidelity
of an OVF.

Sandman:
focus peaking is required to do any focusing when
zoomed out mode.

nospam:
it helps in many cases but it's certainly not required.

Sandman:
It is.

nope

Incorrect.

--
Sandman

In article , Me
wrote:

I wanted to focus on the pigeon's eye. Where within all the
surrounding foliage do you think the camera wanted to focus?
I can't remember but I do remember I had to finish focussing with a
manual adjustment.

learn how to use the autofocus system properly.

pick a point and put it on the bird. it will focus faster and more
accurately than you could, regardless of screen.

The D300 (as I used then) does not focus on points. Nor does the D750
or anything else I know of.

nonsense. of course they do.

as the saying goes: rtfm.

The AF system does not focus on "points".
It focuses on an "area" hopefully roughly the same as the area marked by
the AF brackets on the VF screen.

nikon calls them points. i'm going to go with what nikon calls them.

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Learn-And...i4pn/51-point-
autofocus-system.html
You can choose to use a single AF point to hone in on an exact spot
on your subject in which to focus on, or use all 51 AF points working
together to capture moving subjects. Using the Dynamic-area AF and
you¹ve also got the choice between 11, 9 or 21 AF points.

his problem is he's using the wrong focus mode.

in other words, user error.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I wanted to focus on the pigeon's eye. Where within all the
surrounding foliage do you think the camera wanted to focus?
I can't remember but I do remember I had to finish focussing with a
manual adjustment.

learn how to use the autofocus system properly.

pick a point and put it on the bird. it will focus faster and more
accurately than you could, regardless of screen.

The D300 (as I used then) does not focus on points. Nor does the D750
or anything else I know of.

nonsense. of course they do.

as the saying goes: rtfm.

As it happens, I have the manual for the D750 at my left hand. I can
assure you that throughout the manual the text refers to the 51
rectangular focus areas as focus points. If you believe the manual the
focus points are rectangular. In fact some are cross-shaped and others
are rectangular.

read the section on single point af.

As is so often the case you are skimming over the
surface of things without asking yourself what it is that actually
lies underneath.

nope.

In article , Me wrote:

Eric Stevens:
I wanted to focus on the pigeon's eye. Where within all the
surrounding foliage do you think the camera wanted to focus?
I can't remember but I do remember I had to finish focussing
with a manual adjustment.

nospam:
learn how to use the autofocus system properly.

pick a point and put it on the bird. it will focus faster and
more accurately than you could, regardless of screen.

Eric Stevens:
The D300 (as I used then) does not focus on points. Nor does the
D750 or anything else I know of.

nospam:
nonsense. of course they do.

as the saying goes: rtfm.

The AF system does not focus on "points". It focuses on an "area"
hopefully roughly the same as the area marked by the AF brackets on
the VF screen.

In a phase detection autofocus, the focusing is done with either vertical or
cross focus points. Nikon's high-end 51 focus points consist of 15 cross points
and 36 vertical focus points. The light is split into either two (vertical focus
points) or four (cross focus points) sensors that detect that phase between them
and adjust the focusing. So it's neither a "point" or an "area", really.

Cross points work best in the center of the frame, and vertical closer to the
edges (due to aberrations), which is why most cameras have the cross focus points
in the middle (Nikon has a 3x5 point array in the middle of the frame).

Contrast detection focusing on the other hand...

--
Sandman