Thinking about autofocus and which way to go

[Autonerd]

I own a few autofocus/auto-wind 35mm SLRs, including a Nikon N8008 and Minolta Maxxum 5, 5000 and 400si. I don't use them much because I find them a bit boring -- but the older I get, the more I realize I need the assistance that autofocus provides.

Last weekend I brought out my N8008 for some snapshots at a wedding. Alas, its got some battery-corrosion issues (first owner left it for 10+ years with batteries in -- what a mess!) and while it has worked in the past, I couldn't get it to stay on reliably. Wound up shooting with my K2 (and hopefully I didn't screw up the focus too badly...).

Still, that got me to thinking that maybe it's time to do a but more auto-focus shooting, see if I can get myself to like it a bit better.

The question is: Which system to get behind?

I'm leaning towards the Nikon. While I have no love (and in fact much disdain) for the Big N, the 8008 came with a bunch of AF lenses -- 50/1.4, 28-85, 35-135, 70-210. All good glass if not particularly fast, but the AF 35-70/2.8 is not too terribly expensive. I have to replace the battery case, but it might be just as cost-effective to buy another whole N8008 (or an N8008s) and have mine as a backup. (I don't have a whole lot of interest in upgrading to an N90 or beyond, not when I'm accustomed to $15 Ricohs.)

Then there's the Maxxum 5, which I think is the most technically advanced camera I own. Problem is, I only have kit lenses, so I'd need more, and it seems like it'd get pretty expensive to recreate what I already have for the Nikon (presumably because Sony uses the same format -- though I wonder if the 18-55 from my Sony 6000 works on the Maxxum 5? Hmmm). Also I'm concerned about the burn rate on CR2 batteries (the Nikon uses AAs). That said, the light weight of the Minolta sure would be welcome, and no worries about backup bodies since M5s are cheap and easy to find in like-new condition.

Despite my anti-Nikon bias, I can't help but think that when one has the option to go Nikon, one should go Nikon. Still, Minolta's a strong underdog.

Yet another option is stick with my Pentaxian ways and invest in a Pentax system -- though I'd be starting from scratch, and I'm not looking to spend a ton o' money. While I know a lot about Ks and Ms and Ps, I know very little about autofocus Pentax 35mm cameras.

Photrians, what do you think?

Aaron

 

[Cholentpot]

EOS is far and away the best of the autofocus systems. From the lowest Rebel to the top SLRs they're all excellent. The lenses focus faster and smoother from the early versions on.

I have many autofocus systems and when I need to make the shot I always reach for the EOS Canons. Manual cameras is a different story.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have been using Nikon AFs since 2004 after using Minoltas from 1966 to 2004 and I have not had a problem with the auto focus. One should read the friendly manual, RTFM, to learn the limitations of auto focus, such as when shooting through leaves the focus may end up on the leaves and not the subject, and then one will avoid focus problems. Auto focus will repeatedly focus more accurately than the human eye according to numerous articles. Do some research.

 

[Les Sarile]

You already have those AF Nikon lenses and you're still considering others while saying you don't want to spend a ton o' money? Are those lenses that bad? Clearly the disdain for the Big N is strong . . .

I had an EOS system with L lenses and they're autofocus never had me waiting even in poor lighting conditions. The 550 flash units made shooting in complete darkness a non-issue as it helps the AF and provided great even coverage.

I shot a few rolls this night and did not get one out of focus frame. With the EOS system, I must've looked the part as they followed my directions and never had anyone wait even for a moment I'm sure Hef and his entourage would not put up with slow photographers . . .

This one with the EOS3+motor drive, 550EX and 16-35 f2.8 L using Fuji Superia 400. Plenty of ways a flash can be fooled but not this system.

Fuji Superia 400-05-16-ICEF by Les DMess, on Flickr

 

[reddesert]

Nikon AF bodies such as the N8008, N80, and N90 are ridiculously undervalued for their capabilities. Basically any AF film body that isn't an F100 or F4/F5/F6 is absurdly cheap, because there are a lot of them and they haven't got the retro appeal of MF film cameras yet. (To quantify absurdly cheap, you can buy one of these bodies in KEH bargain condition for about $50, even cheaper from a random ebay seller, with fewer guarantees.) Since you already have the lenses, that would be an easy way to go to see if you can get accustomed to AF. The later N80/N90 cameras have faster AF than the N8008, perhaps none as fast as the fastest of other systems; though it sounds like you are interested in focus assist/confirmation perhaps more than absolute speed.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Auto focus can have trouble focusing when there is very little contrast but then everyone would have some trouble with the same subject in manual focus. In that case when the focus wanders just switch to manual focus.

 

[xkaes]

Then there's the Maxxum 5, which I think is the most technically advanced camera I own. Problem is, I only have kit lenses, so I'd need more, and it seems like it'd get pretty expensive to recreate what I already have for the Nikon (presumably because Sony uses the same format -- though I wonder if the 18-55 from my Sony 6000 works on the Maxxum 5? Hmmm). Also I'm concerned about the burn rate on CR2 batteries (the Nikon uses AAs). That said, the light weight of the Minolta sure would be welcome, and no worries about backup bodies since M5s are cheap and easy to find in like-new condition.

Stick with the MAXXUM 5. Like you said, it's the best of the best. MAXXUM lenses are the best and really inexpensive. Sell your Nikon gear, and it will pay for any lenses you need. Basically any Sony a-mount lens will work on your MAXXUM 5 -- in addition to any Tokina, Sigma, Tamron, etc. glass. SEE:

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/first-film-camera-recommendations.199359/page-4#post-2686915

 

[Les Sarile]

Auto focus can have trouble focusing when there is very little contrast but then everyone would have some trouble with the same subject in manual focus. In that case when the focus wanders just switch to manual focus.

I believe all AF capable cameras have even tinier VF magnification making manual focusing even harder.

 

[Don_ih]

I wonder if the 18-55 from my Sony 6000 works on the Maxxum 5?

The answer to that question is "No." The a6000 mount (E-mount) is not the same as the full-frame Sony Alpha mount, nor will the lenses made for APS-C cover 35 mm. Mirrorless cameras also have a shorter flange-to-sensor distance than SLRs.

AF capable cameras have even tinier VF magnification making manual focusing even harder.

Yeah - a lot are virtually impossible without focus assist of some sort.

 

[ic-racer]

I believe all AF capable cameras have even tinier VF magnification making manual focusing even harder.

As nice and inexpensive as the Nikon AF cameras are, the high end ones (f100, f5, f6) are needed if one wants to manual focus on a regular basis. Those top of the line cameras have viewfinder images similar or identical manual focus cameras. The f6 being especially nice because its meter will work with all the pre-chip vintage Nikon manual focus lenses without having to put an aftermarket chip on the lens.

 

[Les Sarile]

As nice and inexpensive as the Nikon AF cameras are, the high end ones (f100, f5, f6) are needed if one wants to manual focus on a regular basis. Those top of the line cameras have viewfinder images similar or identical manual focus cameras. The f6 being especially nice because its meter will work with all the pre-chip vintage Nikon manual focus lenses without having to put an aftermarket chip on the lens.

The F5/F6 tiny magnification is only 0.74X compared to the FM3A at 0.83X. The EOS1 is same as the F5/F6.

By comprison, the MX has a near lifesize VF magnification of 0.97X. Was eye opening when I first looked through it.

EOS3-MX by Les DMess, on Flickr

 

[ic-racer]

Agree, as nice as the F6 viewfinder is, the viewfinder images on some vintage manual focus cameras are bigger. I have a Yashica FX-3 and Nikon F6 in front of me now. The tiny Yashica has the bigger image.

 

[Cholentpot]

The F5/F6 tiny magnification is only 0.74X compared to the FM3A at 0.83X. The EOS1 is same as the F5/F6.

By comprison, the MX has a near lifesize VF magnification of 0.97X. Was eye opening when I first looked through it.

EOS3-MX by Les DMess, on Flickr

I'm backing EOS as the best outfocus and autofocus lens system not because it's the most enjoyable to use or look at or any prior attachment. It just is the best.

Everyone is going to come out of the woodwork and list their preferred system and tout how AF is really not all that great and it's your fault etc and etc.

EOS with a halfway decent lens, I'm talking even the standard 50 1.8, does not miss. It's fast, it's clean. There is no generational confusion about the lenses like Nikon. A EF lens will work on an EOS camera. Confusion comes in when moving to digital with the EF-S but that's not here nor there.

Any EF lens will work on any EOS camera. Just that alone makes the EOS system the greatest. I can use a 70-200 2.8 III on my Elan, Rebel or 5DMk4 and it just does its job without complaint. I can't say the same for my Nikon cameras or Minoltas or whomever else. Furthermore the cheap EOS cameras focus just as well as the top of the line. I'm sure the F5 and F6 cameras are awesome but for a 4th of the price I can get an EOS camera that'll focus just as well.

Make an argument why EOS is not the best autofocus system.

 

[ic-racer]

I grew up thinking the EOS was the best 35mm system ever. But I went with Nikon, with which I never had any interest in, primalrly because the Nikon cameras were still in production. That is, when I got my F6 it was still a current production model, long after the EOS had ceased production.

Of course that may not matter any longer as Nikon ceased F6 production.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have Minolta A mount, Pentax K and KA AF, Sigma SA, and Nikon F4, including I have all the top body Minolta AF, 9000, 800si, 9XI, and 9, a lot lens ranging from kit lens to G non SSM. Now that Sony has abandoned the Minolta A mount for E mount, older but very capable Minolta lens are plentiful and less expensive when matched against comparable Pentax or Nikon lens. In terms of bodies, your 5 will work with all A mount lens from early 5 pin to Sony SSM lens. As you stick with the 5 or a 7, you will not run into any lens compatibility issues. I don't think the Pentax AF bodies are hold up as well others. Saying that, if I had to do it all over again I would gone with Canon EOS. As noted by Cholentop above , just every Canon F mount full frame lens including VR lens will work on all film bodies, that includes VR lens. If you decide on expanding your Minolta A system, I recommend really inexpensive first generation 80 to 200 F4 and 35 to 70 3.5, the 35 to 70 is a Leica design, the 80 to 200 was a Minolta MF designed tweaked by Leica. In terms of primes the 50 1.7 is a bargain, as is the 28 2.8. Slow but sharp is the newer 8 pin 28 to 100. The only lens that are still on the pricy side are the G telephotos, the 300, 400 and longer.

 

[4season]

IMO, Canon pretty much nailed modern autofocus with their EOS system. Pentax, Minolta and Nikon, not so much. Possible downside is that EF->Sony E lens adapters are kind of expensive, because they contain electronics (not optional!). But OTOH, all lens functions are supported by the host system.

 

[Cholentpot]

I grew up thinking the EOS was the best 35mm system ever. But I went with Nikon, with which I never had any interest in, primalrly because the Nikon cameras were still in production. That is, when I got my F6 it was still a current production model, long after the EOS had ceased production.

Of course that may not matter any longer as Nikon ceased F6 production.

In the long view, Nikon made the greatest 35mm SLRs. The Nikon F series are head and shoulders above everything else. For manual focus cameras and prime lenses Nikon is king.

I have Minolta A mount, Pentax K and KA AF, Sigma SA, and Nikon F4, including I have all the top body Minolta AF, 9000, 800si, 9XI, and 9, a lot lens ranging from kit lens to G non SSM. Now that Sony has abandoned the Minolta A mount for E mount, older but very capable Minolta lens are plentiful and less expensive when matched against comparable Pentax or Nikon lens. In terms of bodies, your 5 will work with all A mount lens from early 5 pin to Sony SSM lens. As you stick with the 5 or a 7, you will not run into any lens compatibility issues. I don't think the Pentax AF bodies are hold up as well others. Saying that, if I had to do it all over again I would gone with Canon EOS. As noted by Cholentop above , just every Canon F mount full frame lens including VR lens will work on all film bodies, that includes VR lens. If you decide on expanding your Minolta A system, I recommend really inexpensive first generation 80 to 200 F4 and 35 to 70 3.5, the 35 to 70 is a Leica design, the 80 to 200 was a Minolta MF designed tweaked by Leica. In terms of primes the 50 1.7 is a bargain, as is the 28 2.8. Slow but sharp is the newer 8 pin 28 to 100. The only lens that are still on the pricy side are the G telephotos, the 300, 400 and longer.

Canon lenses are cheap and plentiful due to their ongoing popularity when the digital switch came about. People just migrated the lenses over. The prices should drop eventually because Canon moved to a new lens mount although the old EF lenses still work fine with an adapter.

 

[Cholentpot]

IMO, Canon pretty much nailed modern autofocus with their EOS system. Pentax, Minolta and Nikon, not so much. Possible downside is that EF->Sony E lens adapters are kind of expensive, because they contain electronics (not optional!). But OTOH, all lens functions are supported by the host system.

One more thing about Canon. On their mid to upper tier models Canon embraced back button focus. I have one Nikon camera that allows this out of my nearly dozen Nikon autofocus. The Minoltas and Pentaxes don't have this feature either on the lower and mid level bodies. Separating the autofocus from the shutter is a very important tool in the autofocus world.

 

[Don_ih]

an argument

The only argument to make in this thread is that @Autonerd already owns Nikon and Minolta stuff, so he should pick from one of those. The af on all af cameras is generally good enough for a casual user. But - yes, the Canon af seems faster than the Nikons I've tried. And, frankly, the Minolta af lenses I have feel cheap.

 

[Cholentpot]

The only argument to make in this thread is that @Autonerd already owns Nikon and Minolta stuff, so he should pick from one of those. The af on all af cameras is generally good enough for a casual user. But - yes, the Canon af seems faster than the Nikons I've tried. And, frankly, the Minolta af lenses I have feel cheap.

Yes, if you already have one system's gear you should stick with it.

If starting from scratch or you're willing to cash out your current gear go with EOS. Even the cheap feeling EOS lenses still focus smoothly. I can't say the same for the low end Nikon stuff.

 

[Sirius Glass]

As nice and inexpensive as the Nikon AF cameras are, the high end ones (f100, f5, f6) are needed if one wants to manual focus on a regular basis. Those top of the line cameras have viewfinder images similar or identical manual focus cameras. The f6 being especially nice because its meter will work with all the pre-chip vintage Nikon manual focus lenses without having to put an aftermarket chip on the lens.

Also N75, N80, F100 ...

 

[Cholentpot]

Also N75, N80, F100 ...

Yes, Nikon does have a nice feature that give a little green dot for focus conformation when using manual lenses.

But we're talking about autofocus. I never missed that feature when using an EOS camera because it wasn't needed.

 

[Paul Howell]

"And, frankly, the Minolta af lenses I have feel cheap."

I agree that the later Minolta and Konica Minolta lens are light, the early lens are heavy and well make, the G lens are in the same league as Canon L, Nikon ED, and Pentax LE lens. I have yet to have Minolta lens "go bad" while I have a a couple of Pentax AF lens belly up. All on Minolta lens are gear driven, don't know if a gear driven lens is less likely to go bad as micro motor driven lens, but all my Sigma SA lens are micro motor driven and I have couple of kit lens stop working while the top end lens are still working just fine.

 

[Besk]

I too am beginning to have problems focusing my manual Nikon SLR due to my age.
I use my manual focus 28/3.5 ais lens on the N75 and that little green dot for focus confirmation is really helpful for aging eyes. (Also got it chipped.)

 

[Sirius Glass]

I too am beginning to have problems focusing my manual Nikon SLR due to my age.
I use my manual focus 28/3.5 ais lens on the N75 and that little green dot for focus confirmation is really helpful for aging eyes. (Also got it chipped.)

Thank you. I forgot about the little green light.