Auto Focus - Ethics

Messages
7
Edit My Images
Yes
Being relatively new to photography (acquired first SLR last year), I'm still discovering that I've picked up bad habits, and trying to nip them in the bud.

Something that only recently dawned on me was the use of AF. I've had my camera for about 11 months now and every shoot I've done, I've not used it. I've only ever used manual focus, for whatever reason. When I first started using my camera I learnt how to use it fully on manual, thinking that it would be in my best interest to do so. I extended that philosophy to focusing too.

I've read/researched a bit more into photography recently than I usually would, and have discovered that in fact most people are using AF, only going manual in certain circumstances.

I haven't thought to question it until now. Manual focusing was the habit I got into and so that's how I shot, up until now. Have I been handicapping myself all this time, or do you think it's good practice to be using manual more than auto (with respects to focusing)?

I'm interested in the general opinion of using AF.
 
I suppose it's what you are comfortable with, I tend to use auto-focussing, and use focussing points a lot, vary rarely using manual focussing.

I reckon both Canon and Nikon have spent zillions getting autofocus to such a level, it's pointless not using this technology.
 
I'd say it's certainly not a bad habit.

In the majority of situations AF will be easier and faster but having the skill to fall back on MF is very handy indeed. At the end of the day if you're more comfortable using MF and can get the quality of results you like then who is anyone else to tell you what's best. :)
 
If you like using manual focus, then do so. Same for AF.

In my case, it really depends what I am doing:

I probably use AF 75% of the time, especially when on a 'walkabout' or general shooting. If I am landscaping then I am probably using my wide angle and will use manual focus for the hyperfocal. For macro stuff I will tend to use manual and live view.
 
I use AF all the time, I don't really see any reason not to use it. I did spend quite a while teaching myself how to use manual focus well though so I could use it at anytime where AF is struggling.

I've taken photos at rallys with all manual lenses and I'm happy enough with the fact I can track the focus on cars while panning and taking shots but I don't see why I would bother giving myself that extra work when I can put it in centre point, AI servo and keep the car in focus without needing to think about it. It just free's you up to think about the finer things like composition.

With landscapes I use hyperfocal focusing but I just use AF to focus where ever I want then lock the focus there.
 
In my case, it really depends what I am doing...

Agreed. Macro work, landscapes, low light are all examples of where manual focus will generally do the job better and quicker than auto focus but for sports for example, it's a no brainer - Autofocus full stop.

Saying that, I once sat with a pro photographer at a Lancashire CC cricket game. He was using an old Nikon lens on a Nikon digital camera and didn't have the AF option. He focussed in advance of the action and hit the shutter release when the action got to where he had focussed - a couple of feet in front of the batsman, centre of the wicket when he wanted to get batsmen crossing, where the bowler came to rest after bowling if he was after an appeal. Now - that took some skill and a good knowledge of the game. How on earth he got the unexpected shots beats me ... but he did.

Alan
 
this thread made me think a bit...the first slrs i used, in the 1980's were all manual focus. when i use slrs today i focus manually without giving it a thought! when i use my bridge camera its always switched to auto focus, if i set it to manual focus i find it really odd and uncomfortable!
its as if when i use digi i naturally use the technology but if i shoot film i dont think twice about focusing manually...odd, but i never thought about this before :shrug:
 
Do you have a car? If so do you use a starting handle to get it going in the morning?

Just because mf was how things had to be done in the past doesn't mean that it is "better" or "correct". Technology makes things easier, whether it is better or not is down to personal preference.

With my first manual focus slr I discovered rather quickly that I wasn't focusing correctly, what I was in fact doing was compensating for the short-sightedness in my right eye and all my photos were turning out blurred :bonk:
 
MF with a 35mm SLR with split prism focusing is/was a whole different ballgame from trying to focus through a titchy, dim viewfinder like a Rebel with no manual focusing aids. I find MF very difficult to perform accurately on my 30D. My 40D and 50D are a bit easier, and my 1D3 is even easier, but none compare to my early 1980s Pentax Super-A for ease of manual focus.

I would not like to try to track my running dog at 10FPS with manual focus, yet my 1D3 makes a fair crack at it. Under normal conditions, AF is there to be used, with manual the exception when for some reason AF will not work, perhaps like when shooting through a fence or tree branches etc.. I see no merit in routinely using MF when AF will get the job done quicker and more accurately.
 
I normally use auto-focus, although I often switch back to manual to make minor final adjustments.

It took me a long time to get used to AF though - years actually. I just didn't feel that I needed it. But I didn't like the way that modern zoom lenses need re-focusing each time you change the focal length. Ok with AF, but horrendous with manual.
 
Under normal conditions, AF is there to be used, with manual the exception when for some reason AF will not work, perhaps like when shooting through a fence or tree branches etc.. I see no merit in routinely using MF when AF will get the job done quicker and more accurately.

Indeed. Especially when other aspects of the photo may be compromised due to dedicating too much thought to focusing.

It's a habit I ought to break.
 
Back
Top