Animal Eye AF

Started 3 months ago | Questions thread
Chikubi
Chikubi Senior Member • Posts: 1,880
Re: Animal Eye AF

tbcass wrote:

Chikubi wrote:

At 50ft, with a FF camera and a 200mm lens, at f/2.8 you have just over 3ft of DOF available to you. (https://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html) This is a pretty typical distance for that kind of focal length usage, so are you telling me that that's not enough to keep a dog, cat, bird, squirrel, etc. in focus? Again, I'm sure if you search you'll be able to find plenty of examples of acceptable photos at pretty much any distance/focal length combo you like.

Most DOF calculators use small 8x10 print as their basis of comparison. That calculator is useless because it fails to take into account print size, viewer eyesight and viewing distance. The following DOF calculator takes all those into consideration in the advanced mode. For a print with a maximum linear dimension of 20 inches, viewing distance of 25cm, 20/20 eyesight, FF camera, 200mm f2.8 the DOF is only about 7 inches.

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/dof-calculator.htm

Actually, thanks for posting the calc. Most people use DOF Master it seems, so good to have a bit of variety for comparison. You make a good point, but the one contention I have with it is that you have the viewing distance set for 25 cm, which is just under 10 inches. I typically print all of my show prints at 12x18" so very close to the 20" size you chose, and I have never seen anyone at one of my shows view one of my prints from that close. Not saying it's impossible, just highly unlikely in normal situations, I think. Most tend to view them at around 3', so if you adjust the calc accordingly you get a DOF of 2.24 ft which I feel is a bit more realistic.

The rest of your post assumes I care about eye AF. I do not, have no use for it and do not own a camera that has it. I am broad minded enough to see where many other people will find it a useful feature.

What I fail to understand is why people like you always seem to dismiss new features and capabilities every time one comes around.

I can only speak for myself, but it's not a matter of trying to dismiss new features outright, as much as not buying into them immediately simply because they now exist. I've been shooting for over 35 years now at this point and have seen a lot of things come and go in that time. Some of them proved to be very beneficial and have stuck around as a result, and a lot more fell by the wayside never to be seen again. Perhaps you could say I'm a bit jaded, but simple truth is that most new features are just not that impressive to me anymore, especially when I already have the skillset on hand to be able to do what they offer just as well without them.

Another thing also, is that I think a lot of mfgs these days, especially in the MILC side of things, are throwing everything but the kitchen sink into these cameras in order to cater to anyone and everyone to generate sales. I realize there are folks that will find various features useful that I and others won't, but the end result is that the feature bloat is getting a bit much and I find it makes the cameras notably more tiresome to use at times compared with older, less featured models. It also has the side effect of blinding less experienced users to the fact that they can also often achieve the same w/o the new feature if they just take the time to learn how. YMMV, but that's not a good thing as I see it as it promotes a limited skillset that can actually hinder one's photography in the long run.

Like I said earlier, I have no problem with new tech (I actually work in IT, so I'm used to it), but it has to prove itself to me as being something truly useful and better than what I already have or can do before I'm willing to adopt it.

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