Manual focus. why the obsession?

Started Jan 20, 2013 | Discussions thread
palincss Contributing Member • Posts: 752
Re: Manual focus. why the obsession?

lnbolch wrote:

It is just one tool in the toolbox, and sometimes it serves the purpose better than AF. In general, it is rarely superior.

A few weeks back, I was the guest of a family in a far northern town, near the edge of civilization. Just before I was to head back south, the whole contingent went to the local rink to see the son play hockey in the peewee level league 11-12 year-olds. Even though the kids are no where near the speed of the recently locked out millionaires of the NHL, hockey at any level is very fast.
As has been hashed over to the level of terminal boredom in Fuji forums, X-cameras can not shoot kiddie sports. The cameras are not capable of follow focus, so are totally useless. Being a guest, I was less than fanatically involved with the sports prowess of little kids, so I put myself in the role of a parent who was, but was stuck with a useless X-Pro1. It was the perfect opportunity to test if this was the truth, of if the people posting simply lacked the skills.

You've certainly proved it was a matter of lacking skills, rather than the camera being useless.

But those statements (useless due to lack of follow focus) make me wonder, are those people completely ignorant of the history of sports photography?   How would they explain photos like these, taken in the 1930s-1950s, long before auto focus or auto exposure?

Are they doing any better now, with all the benefits of modern technology?

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow