I used 'em all the time until I got into autofocus.
IMO, AF of any sort promotes the 'point at the main subject, get it in
focus and take a shot' approach to photography. For example, if I
have two subjects on different planes of focus and want both in focus
there better be something on which to AF that is exactly 1/3 of the
distance behind the first subject. If not, I'm stuck with focusing
manually on a screen that was not designed to do that, without the
benefit of a DOF scale if it's a zoom and only limited scales on a lot
of primes. Canon's DEP mode is useful in such situations though I
don't always trust the decisions it makes.
With a good manual focus camera and lens, I check the focus point for
each subject and decide which aperture to use based on the DOF scale
and shoot.
And I quite agree that Circle of Confusion is well named.
FWIW/ScottGee1
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:05:57 -0800, Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Come to think of it, the last time I used DOF scales with any frequency
> was with my Leica M3 of many years ago. Even with the nice scales on
> the OM primes, I hardly used them. Much easier to see what you are
> going to get.
>
> Winsor
> Long Beach, California, USA
> On Mar 30, 2005, at 6:20 AM, Walt Wayman wrote:
>
> > I'm in Winsor's camp on this, which makes me sort of wonder why I got
> > into this discussion to begin with. I rarely consult the DOF marks
> > and wouldn't miss them if they were gone. Determining what's in focus
> > and what ain't is what viewfinders and DOF preview buttons are for.
> > If a camera's viewfinder is not good enough to allow me to see this
> > clearly, that's not a camera I'll use.
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|