S3's manual focus vs. FZ-30's

Can you explain the difference in the Manula Focusing of these two cameras? I think I understand how the FZ-30 works; as it's much like that of a DSLR. You actually focus that one by physically turing the lens. But how does the S3 work? Which is easier and especially more reliable?
Thanks
Bob

BobT said:

Can you explain the difference in the Manula Focusing of these two
cameras? I think I understand how the FZ-30 works; as it's much
like that of a DSLR. You actually focus that one by physically
turing the lens. But how does the S3 work? Which is easier and
especially more reliable?
Thanks
Bob,

Click to expand...

The S3 review can be seen at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canons3is/ it should provide the info you need.

--
Bob,

'We don't make a photograph just with a camera; we bring

to the act of photography all the books we have read, the movies we have seen, the music we have heard, the people we have loved.' Ansel Adams



Great Pro1
Casio Z750

Bob,

I have not used the FZ-30 but it sounds better than the S3's manual focus. On the S3 you hold in the manual focus button on the side of the lens and use the 4 way switch with your thumb to move the focus in and out. It does give a digital zoom of the focus spot to help you fine tune your focus. Another feature on the S3 focus is once you get the focus close you can hit the set button and the auto focus will fine tune the focus for you. While the feature is nice I think the focus ring would be better. The S3s manual focus takes some practice to get good.

Doug

Doug,

My scenario for MF is something like this.

There's a deer in the woods. Visable by eye, but having to disregard trees and brush in front of it. I want to capture the deer, but will need to obviously throw the forground out of focus, causing only the deer to remain in focus.

The AF will put the trees and brush in front of the deer into focus, while rendering the deer out of focus. Won't do.

So it looks like you would suggest the Panasonic for this job; as it's easier to get the job done by the turn of the lens rather than by flipping through the 4-way.

Thanks
Bob

All other things being equal, I think a manual focus ring (or a manual zoom ring) would always give you more precise focussing/zooming ability.

Manual focus on a superzoom is particularly important in my opinion, and Canon just did not provide a nice MF layout for the S2 / S3. Having to hold the MF button down while you make the adjustment is ridiculous and one of the bigger drawbacks of the S3 in my opinion, in addition to the crude adjustment steps it seems to take when you do the adjustment.

At first I didn't understand why they made it to where you had to hold the MF button down to make the adjustment. But later figured it is probably because in total manual mode, both directions on the multi-function button are already being used (one for aperture, the other for shutter speed). But at least for the other modes, they could have made it to where you don't have to hold the MF button down. Oh well, still a nice camera.

The most critical step using manual focus is detecting when the image is focused by looking at the LCD or EVF. For me the LCD amd EVF resolution of the S3 is much too coarse to tell when focus is achieved. The fine tuning by the camera's AF is probably Canon's way of admitting this. But my question is what's the difference between doing this and starting with AF from the beginning? If the same, it would be doing a lot of extra work for nothing.

--mamallama

I own FZ-30.

Yes, the manual focus is pretty usable, thanks to the LCD screen with 230K pixels.

Although, the focus ring does not function manually, it just activates the motor in the lens when you turn it.

On the other hand, FZ-30 has a true manual zoom ring. And that is a kicker.

[No message]

Prompted by your post, I just tried the S3's manual focus (MF) for the first time and it's employed just as dborros described: while holding down the MF button on the barrel with the left forefinger, you focus using the up and down positions of the four-way button. A magnified digital zoom box of the subject appears at center to aid the focus. Finally, you can auto fine-tune by pressing the Set button to focus on a point at the target; I didn't use this.

I've a broadly-woven wicker table, fully enclosed, with some shoes on a shelf inside and I tried to use the MF to take pictures with flash of the doors, then the shoes visible through the gridwork of the doors, then the wickerwork visible through the doors at the back of the stand, behind the shoes. As you might imagine such a target sends the auto focus into a tailspin.

All pictures came out well and I found the magnified image at center (which can be turned off) made adjusting the focus easy.

However, the handling is awkward at first and to my mind there is no way such a setup can compete with the ease, speed or precision of a well-designed, large focus ring around a barrel which you may be using also to support the camera. (I'm not familiar with the FZ-30.)

After accustomization, I suspect the S3's MF could be reliably used on inanimate objects or animate which are slow moving or over which you have some control.

In sum, the MF seems not a selling point, but I believe I'm glad the S3 has it and now that I've used it, I suspect I'll be experimenting with it further.

Incidentally, on the brighter side one selling point for me in favor of the S3 was the burst modes of which there are two, 1.5 and 2.3 shots per second. I found continuous shooting far superior to a Sony H-series camera I used, in speed and capacity, with or without the flash. I mention this as the burst mode may be a consideration in photographing a still deer on the verge of bounding away. If you can get him in focus of course.

mamallama said:

For me the LCD amd
EVF resolution of the S3 is much too coarse to tell when focus is
achieved. The fine tuning by the camera's AF is probably Canon's
way of admitting this. But my question is what's the difference
between doing this and starting with AF from the beginning? If the
same, it would be doing a lot of extra work for nothing.

--mamallama

Click to expand...

Turn to page 66 of your Canon S3's manual (you have an S3, yes?). The purpose of pressing the SET button during a manual focus to "fine-tune," as you write, is clearly stated: the difference between SET to refocus during MF and using AF should be obvious. Its effectiveness is another issue. (I've yet to use it.)

You see the magnified image at center during a manual focus, right? You must have it toggled on, though I believe this is the default setting at shipment. The detail in this magnified image should be fairly easy to pick up.

scudderbug said:

mamallama said:

For me the LCD amd
EVF resolution of the S3 is much too coarse to tell when focus is
achieved. The fine tuning by the camera's AF is probably Canon's
way of admitting this. But my question is what's the difference
between doing this and starting with AF from the beginning? If the
same, it would be doing a lot of extra work for nothing.

--mamallama

Click to expand...

Turn to page 66 of your Canon S3's manual (you have an S3, yes?).
The purpose of pressing the SET button during a manual focus to
"fine-tune," as you write, is clearly stated: the difference
between SET to refocus during MF and using AF should be obvious.
Its effectiveness is another issue. (I've yet to use it.)

Click to expand...

The difference in effectiveness is my question. If the same, why do it?

--mamallama

mamallama said:

The difference in effectiveness is my question. If the same, why do
it?

--mamallama

Click to expand...

"The difference in effectiveness"? Hehe.

Well, I don't know that it's ineffective, I haven't tried it yet.

Read page 66 of your manual. This should clearly answer your quesiton. If not, come back and ask me again.

scudderbug said:

scudderbug said:

The difference in effectiveness is my question. If the same, why do
it?

--mamallama

Click to expand...

"The difference in effectiveness"? Hehe.

Well, I don't know that it's ineffective, I haven't tried it yet.

Read page 66 of your manual. This should clearly answer your
quesiton. If not, come back and ask me again.

Click to expand...

My page 66 doesn't answer my question, clearly or unclearly. It never even addresses difference in effectiveness between AF fine tuning after manual focusing and straight AF. Sorry.

--mamallama

mamallama said:

My page 66 doesn't answer my question, clearly or unclearly. It
never even addresses difference in effectiveness between AF fine
tuning after manual focusing and straight AF. Sorry.

--mamallama

Click to expand...

Re-read page 66 of your Canon S3's manual and quote specifically the part you are having difficulty understanding and I will try to help you.

Of course the other obvious option is for you to simply pick up your S3 and try it: describe what happened and the results.

scudderbug said:

scudderbug said:

My page 66 doesn't answer my question, clearly or unclearly. It
never even addresses difference in effectiveness between AF fine
tuning after manual focusing and straight AF. Sorry.

--mamallama

Click to expand...

Re-read page 66 of your Canon S3's manual and quote specifically
the part you are having difficulty understanding and I will try to
help you.

Click to expand...

I did reread page 66 and you're right. It said that the effectiveness is the same and you should use the manual focus first technique only if you want to exercise you fingers. And if you want to do it faster just go with autofocus.

--mamallama

mamallama said:

I did reread page 66 and you're right. It said that the
effectiveness is the same and you should use the manual focus first
technique only if you want to exercise you fingers. And if you want
to do it faster just go with autofocus.

--mamallama

Click to expand...

The S3 manual does not say that.

Either you have not re-opened your manual--and I'm baffled as to why--or perhaps you read the page, understood your confusion and you are reacting to my direction to your manual which you felt was dismissive. When someone is confused, there's nothing more off-putting than to receive a read-the-fricking-manual response: so forgive me, that wasn't my intention.

The distinction is easily cleared up if you read the brief paragraph on it on page 66. But if you truly take issue with what the manual says, quote the specific sentence.

Moreover, I just tried using the "fine-tune" as you call it during a manual focus and then using the auto focus on the mixed-depth subject (a wicker stand) which I described in this post in this thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=20460747

The results were entirely different.

Try it with your S3 and we'll compare photographs.

The S3's manual focus works just like the manual focus on my S1, which I have used quite a bit. Especially for stationary sports, like gymnastics and cheerleading, where there are lots of limbs and such flying around to confuse the autofocus, but the target remains basically in the same spot.

The S1's manual focus works, but it is awkward as heck to push two buttons at the same time (MF button and the 4-way switch) and I don't like it. Even with the center magnified, it takes too much time to get the focus right, and there are too many times when I get the focus wrong. Manual focus and low light performance are my main gripes with the S1, and the main reason why I have so resisted the S3.

The FZ30 and FZ50 are attractive because of their manual focus rings, but the problem of course is the sensor, bad noise on the FZ30 and even worse noise reduction on the FZ50. Both are better in good light at low ISO, but I take a fair number of pictures in low light. My present plan is to make the Big Shift to DSLR with the Pentax 100D. Image-stabilized zoom coverage similar to the S3 can be had for around $800, or if zoom isn't an issue the camera plus kit lens is around $600.

I'll really miss the video--- the selling feature of the S3 in my mind---but the K100's features are worth the $400 or so of price difference.

--Brett Turner

BobT said:

Doug,

My scenario for MF is something like this.

There's a deer in the woods. Visable by eye, but having to
disregard trees and brush in front of it. I want to capture the
deer, but will need to obviously throw the forground out of focus,
causing only the deer to remain in focus.

The AF will put the trees and brush in front of the deer into
focus, while rendering the deer out of focus. Won't do.

So it looks like you would suggest the Panasonic for this job; as
it's easier to get the job done by the turn of the lens rather than
by flipping through the 4-way.

Thanks
Bob

Click to expand...

Check the similar tests I did here, with a near and a farther away object both visible in the middle of the frame. Full tele, shallow DOF, tripod.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=21969586

This is for short distances though, and MF works very well indeed.

For longer distances, full tele, its almost unusable cause even though the center magnifies its too little to judge focus or not. Maybe a few presses on the "set"-button can help after somewhat tuning the focus as good as you can, I'll have to check that later on when we get better (and warmer) weather over here...

One thing for sure is that the layout of the MF is very nice. Not as a focus ring around the lens, but that is another budget and size class of cameras. Those who cant press two buttons at the same time maybe should look for some other camera...