An autofocus camera is not a modern alternative to a manual focus camera, it's just a different beast. You get a brighter viewfinder, but you lose the ability to easily and correctly focus manually, because focusing screens in autofocus cameras are optimized for light transmission not for help in focusing.
If you take pictures of fast moving subjects (such ad dogs and children) then autofocus is helpful. If you do street photography, or just cityscape etc then autofocus is a hindrance. If forces you to focus-lock-recompose which I find quite suboptimal. Besides with autofocus lenses you often have to give up on scale focusing. Depth of field marks are just a suggestion, but a useful one!
Finally, I have nothing against a more recent camera that works. But all the automation in it (autofocus, motors) is something that can break or go out of calibration more easily than gears. Motor-induced noise can also be very annoying in certain circumstances. It's horses for courses, younger horses are not necessarily better.
Generally speaking, I've no consideration for matrix metering at all. If you can't use an external light meter, you are better off using an internal one (whatever, but not "matrix") and then compensating manually than relying on what the camera thinks you should be doing (and the camera certainly cannot know better than you).
Yes, it's the 21st century my Canon A1 has only had to have the battery replaced
three times in the twenty three years I have owned it., and I always carry a spare
I have a Canon EF as well, and I prefer it too, but there's very few of them about,especially in good usable condition, there's bags of AE1s and A1s around there cheap and plentiful.I prefer the Canon EF
All this reminds me of one thing.
Regarding autofocus, a friend of mine had a Canon film model, AF mount, I don't remember which model, which had a very advanced autofocus feature: the camera has several AF points, and could be instructed to focus on the AF point where the photographer is looking at the moment. Some sort of sensor looks toward the photographer's eye, and understands which AF point is it looking at, and uses that AF point to focus.
I couldn't believe that. We went to his house and he showed me the thing. And it really worked! That, I think, was a sensible technical innovation. If one can train his eye to look at the focus point just before releasing the shutter, this mechanism, besides working very well for moving subjects, would also end the focus-lock-recompose ballet which one normally has to do with an AF camera.
I'm generally weary of electronic in lenses (it breaks, it suffers condensations, it wears etc.) but this was a really interesting innovation, I was certainly impressed.
Canon eye control- available on the EOS Elan IIE, EOS IXe, EOS-3, EOS Elan 7E, and EOS Elan 7NE
I've never owned one Chan but I used to sell them, and I found they didn't work for everybody, I couldn't make them work for me, but some customers thought they were the best thing since sliced bread.Obviously the system doesn't work well enough. Canon never put it into their top of the line cameras like EoS-1n or 1v. Nor that they put it in any of their DSLR.
Agree 100%. The veneration of relics like SRTs, OM1s, Nikkormats, and AE1s and other 30+ year old cameras ignores the rock-bottom prices on much newer AF models like Nikon's that work nicely as manual focus bodies. Know very few people who will shell out as much--often more--than their "classic" mechanical cost for a competent CLA and/or fix. Bought a very clean Nikon N90s for way south of $100 last year. Who wants a crusty late 60's SRT 101 with battery issues and looming age-related problems? For what's left of the analogue era, I'll take newer/better/cheaper/plentiful any day. What's the point of a retro fashion statement?
You are starting with the false assumption that newer *is* always equal to better.
Mechanical shutters hardly ever fail suddenly: they (sometimes) slowly become less accurate over decades. Electronic shutters definitely are prone to instant and unexpected failure (been there, done that...).
"Battery issues" are a non-issue (or, more of an imagination-challenged issue).
The only purely age-related problems are foam seals (for those cameras which have them) and cheap (usually East Block European) cloth shutters sometimes age badly.
AF focusing screens *do* work poorly for manual focus (if you'd ever used a truly good focussing screen/veiefinder/viewfinder system, you'd realize that).
So to the OP, do get a "crusty old 1960's relic": it might well need a CLA, but then it will last you a lifetime, unlike an auto-everything camera which is only as reliable as its weakest transistor.
CGW! The AF screens are harder to focus that is if you don't use any focusing aid. using electronic rangefinder then it doesn't matter what kind of screen it is. But if I get an slr I want to focus with the focusing screen and on any part of the screen not just the center or at an AF point.
Girls were attracted to my silver OM-1n like moths to a flame, but they just don't dig my "professional black" OM-2n in the same way. I was tempted to get a silver OM-2n for that very reason, but so far Im managing to keep my vanity in checkWhat's the point of a retro fashion statement?
Then just do it! How do you cope with a central focus aid on a MF camera when focusing on an off-centre point? Not having this problem at all with Nikon AF bodies.
No dice. Newer is newer. Low rollage oldies are an exception but petroleum-based lubes used in the shutter trains gum up and require service that's getting rare and pricey and harder to find(ever notice the constant pleas for service leads on elderly cameras hereabouts?).
Funny I've never had Nikon AF shutter/metering electronics fail--ever. That's including hard, unsympathetic use in a few cases including wet/damp/dusty/impact/vibration/temp extreme conditions on high-rollage used bodies as well as new. My only problem with an "electronic" Nikon is a slightly faded LCD meter display on an early F3.
Mickey Mouse/survivalist solutions with o-rings and short-lived hearing aid batteries are a PITA workaround for old gear that used mercury batteries. Sure it's possible but who needs it when AA-powered cameras are available?
AF cameras work nicely for MF with MF lenses, especially Nikons. Yes I've used cameras with all kinds of focus aids/screens and don't find the AF models inferior with their electronic rangefinders. Your opinion perhaps but not my experience re: AF screens and manual focusing.
Overall, parts and service are becoming an issue for many older MF bodies as makers refuse service on old stuff and veteran service techs retire or pass on.
Well, my reference in that field allows snappy, easy and accurate focus *anywhere* on the field.
Think a Nikon H screen (you have tried one, right?), but much better...
I'll repeat, I find that focusing an AF nikon body (I do still have one) with MF lenses a real PITA. But De Gustibus....
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?