- Messages
- 1,620
- Name
- Stephen
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Spent 3 hours walking around my area, loved the "slowness" of everything. Expectations are low, then the only way is UP! Thanks for all the advice, really appreciate it.
Spent 3 hours walking around my area, loved the "slowness" of everything. Expectations are low, then the only way is UP! Thanks for all the advice, really appreciate it.
@excalibur2 Thanks for that. I'm running a film through the Nikon F and then one through the Pentax. I'm sure that the price of film has gone up THIS week.
Found some shots that I'd taken in 1984 of a local hockey match. HOW did I manage to manually focus when the plyers were running about all over the place?
To fit a flash one had to carry an adapter. When the flash was attached the film could not be rewound/changed.
Your eyesight was probably better in those days, plus the comparatively large focus rings on latter-day manual focus 35mm SLRs were nicely dampened, smooth to operate and easy to use, unlike the comparatively narrow (and often slightly jerky on consumer lenses) focus rings on auto focus SLR lenses, which I think are probably only there to provide the option of occasional fine adjustment, rather than as a secondary means of 'full time' focusing. If I had to focus manually then I know which of the two would be more likely to give me good results.Found some shots that I'd taken in 1984 of a local hockey match. HOW did I manage to manually focus when the plyers were running about all over the place?
Modern auto-focus lenses are fly-by-wire which, despite their best intentions, are nowhere near as satisfying to use as a classic manual lens. Unless it happens to be a Russian lens, which my father, a heavy-engineering fitter, described as needing a Stilson wrench to turn.Your eyesight was probably better in those days, plus the comparatively large focus rings on latter-day manual focus 35mm SLRs were nicely dampened, smooth to operate and easy to use, unlike the comparatively narrow (and often slightly jerky on consumer lenses) focus rings on auto focus SLR lenses, which I think are probably only there to provide the option of occasional fine adjustment, rather than as a secondary means of 'full time' focusing. If I had to focus manually then I know which of the two would be more likely to give me good results.
For Nikon, only the AF-P lenses are fly-by-wire. Most of their other recent lenses are AF-S, which do have a mechanical focus ring. But they still aren't nearly as nice to focus as the properly damped lenses from the manual focus era. And there aren't many AF-S lenses with aperture rings, so most are no good on cameras like the F. Most of the earlier 'screwdriver' AF lenses do have aperture rings and should generally be backwards-compatible.Modern auto-focus lenses are fly-by-wire which, despite their best intentions, are nowhere near as satisfying to use as a classic manual lens. Unless it happens to be a Russian lens, which my father, a heavy-engineering fitter, described as needing a Stilson wrench to turn.
Nice turn of phrase, though my Helios 44K-4 is as smooth as butter to focus, love it. I have to keep reminding myself it's for exploring fancy bokeh!Modern auto-focus lenses are fly-by-wire which, despite their best intentions, are nowhere near as satisfying to use as a classic manual lens. Unless it happens to be a Russian lens, which my father, a heavy-engineering fitter, described as needing a Stilson wrench to turn.