manual focus,where did it go ??

[Jay Turberville]

Oxygen breathing, carbon consuming, upright posture, bipedal
locomotion, opposable thumbs, two eyes, one mouth, just like the
majority of humans.

... silver flute playing, painted nude model photographing, glass blowing, hemp shoe wearing, argumentative, all - American conformist.

That's Joe. The poster child for conformity.

Though he does shoot Nikons ...

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Jay Turberville]

Does Nikon even sell a split prism screen for their DSLRs?

No. They never have.

So my follow-on point would be that if Nikon can't be bothered to supply a split prism focus screen, then we can hardly expect them to bother to redesign the AF for more sensitive and better color corrected spot metering. That's not to say they couldn't, just that it isn't to be expected.

The best third party screen for these cameras that I have used is
Katz Eye. The prisms are sized much more conveniently.

I sorta wish they didn't treat the split prism so that it wouldn't black out. I suspect this decreases its precision. Though I can't say that for sure.

Now Katz Eye and Haouda (I may have spelled that wrong) make split
image screens for all Nikon DSLRs. They're tricky on models that use
the "factory service" method of accessing the screen, but it is
possible. The complexity scares a lot of users, and many send their
cameras in to Katz Eye to have the screens changed.

Some of the Olympus schemes are similarly scary. The repair guys at Tempe Camera gave me a quote of $50 to install the screen in my E-300. Said they'd do it while I waited. About a half hour later they asked me to come back the next day. I suspect it was a bit trickier than they bargained for.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Jay Turberville]

Not sure how this "misinformation" has gotten around - I installed a
Katz Eye screen on my Pentax *ist DS about a week ago so I could
better utilize the collection of manual focus lenses I have. Works
great - AND spot metering (and spot focusing) work like a charm!! If
anything, better than before.

Which makes me wonder if that Pentax also uses AF sensors for its center spot metering.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

Does Nikon even sell a split prism screen for their DSLRs?

No. They never have.

So my follow-on point would be that if Nikon can't be bothered to
supply a split prism focus screen, then we can hardly expect them to
bother to redesign the AF for more sensitive and better color
corrected spot metering. That's not to say they couldn't, just that
it isn't to be expected.

That's also pretty much my take on it.

The best third party screen for these cameras that I have used is
Katz Eye. The prisms are sized much more conveniently.

I sorta wish they didn't treat the split prism so that it wouldn't
black out. I suspect this decreases its precision. Though I can't
say that for sure.

It's kind of weird...

The treatment actually gives the prism a little "roughness". Think of it as "ground glass" or really tiny microprisms on the prism wedges themselves. Not as much roughness as a focusing screen, which is typically designed for about a 14 degree (f4) to 20 degree (f2.8) scattering cone, more like a 5 degree (f11) cone. So, although the prisms are aimed at opposing spots on the 5 degree (f5.6) ring of the exit pupil, it also picks up some light scatter all the way in to 2.5 degrees, the f11 ring.

You see something you're not used to with a split image, they actually go out of focus a bit when the focus is way off, but because it's a real narrow cone, they don't go out of focus all that much).

I don't think it decreases precision, because even the OOF effect doesn't diminish the eye's ability to see the images in relative position to each other.

Personally, I like the plus. I don't like the "opti-brite".

Now Katz Eye and Haouda (I may have spelled that wrong) make split
image screens for all Nikon DSLRs. They're tricky on models that use
the "factory service" method of accessing the screen, but it is
possible. The complexity scares a lot of users, and many send their
cameras in to Katz Eye to have the screens changed.

Some of the Olympus schemes are similarly scary. The repair guys at
Tempe Camera gave me a quote of $50 to install the screen in my
E-300. Said they'd do it while I waited. About a half hour later
they asked me to come back the next day. I suspect it was a bit
trickier than they bargained for.

Sounds about par for the course.

I've seen instructions for changing screens that start "grind a notch like the one pictured into the end of a jeweler's screwdriver". I have one advantage: I own a set of "spring hooks", odd tools designed to manipulate the springs of a flute or other woodwind. They can also manipulate the bails on most DSLR screens. I think Microtools carries them, but I got mine from Farlees.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

Not sure how this "misinformation" has gotten around - I installed a
Katz Eye screen on my Pentax *ist DS about a week ago so I could
better utilize the collection of manual focus lenses I have. Works
great - AND spot metering (and spot focusing) work like a charm!! If
anything, better than before.

Which makes me wonder if that Pentax also uses AF sensors for its
center spot metering.

I'm beginning to think that everybody does, except Nikon.

Didn't you say the other day that Oly appeared to spot meter with the AF sensors.

And since Canon actually sells split image screens for the 1D and 1Ds class DSLRs, they must be doing it, too.

Which only leaves Sony as an unknown.

Have not heard comments about the accuracy or color sensitivity of Canon, Oly, Pentax, or Sony spot meters, though.
--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

Oxygen breathing, carbon consuming, upright posture, bipedal
locomotion, opposable thumbs, two eyes, one mouth, just like the
majority of humans.

... silver flute playing, painted nude model photographing, glass
blowing, hemp shoe wearing, argumentative, all - American conformist.

As well as permutations and combinations like glass flute playing, painted nude model playing painted silver flute photographing...

That's Joe. The poster child for conformity.

You forgot vegetarian and mystic

Though he does shoot Nikons ...

Would you believe, back when I made that decision, I had not yet met Bryce, my mentor shot Leica, Pentax, and Voigtlander, my uncles John and Sam shot Canon, and two of my friends shot Pentax. Nikon in that crowd was actually non-conformist.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[funnelwebmaster]

Dude, get a grip. If throwing out a few french phrases gives you such jolly pleasure, by all mean go for it - you won't find me getting all self-congratulatory. But you do seem easily amused. And yes, French isn't my language (never said it was) but I wont bore you with the other three languages I actually am fluent in.

I simply find your assertion that there is no merit to split prism focusing in the digital age myopic and narrowminded, and your contention that it would be a 'step back' reactionary. It's that simple. Because i don't believe (as you seem to believe) that incorporating split prism focusing (without sacrificing other features that we all hold dear) is really that much of a leap for a company like Nikon or Canon or Fuji or any of the others. That about sums it up. Given the advances we've seen in just the past 24 months in digital camera technology, your pessimism seems overblown and shortsighted. And history is full of those who said "no, not possible, ridiculous!' and who then are forced to eat their words. I think you're one of those. If and when Nikon feels that there is a demand for that technology, it will happen.

Ciao, Baby!!

--
My Art, Your Pleasure



http://photopedia.homestead.com

 

[funnelwebmaster]

Nice summary of the past and present. I'm talking about the future. I read nothing in your historical survey that would make split prism technology unworkable, give the desire to accomplish it.

--
My Art, Your Pleasure



http://photopedia.homestead.com

 

[funnelwebmaster]

Really, your rudeness and arrogance are invigorating to me.

This is not surprising. Since it is you chose to fertilize what was a
civil thread with mounds of rudeness and ignorance, one can only
conclude that this is the environment in which you thrive.

Sir, do not confuse 'mounds of rudeness' with an opinion forcefully stated. And your conclusions are based on less that credible evidence; you should re-examine your critical processes - they are much too lax.

But I must ask - are you some kind of apologist for Nikon?

Why "must" you ask? Will your world be incomplete if you do not
manage to get some sort of admission from me? Is everyone who does
not refer to Nikon the way you do, using obscenities, an apologist?

Please, Sir, point out the so-called obscenities that I used. I think you'll find that referring to the collective derriere of the Nikon corporation is hardly an obscenity. Unless one is a reactionary prude (not that i'm calling you that - just an example)

But hey, I bet you think you're really cute, spelling a$$ with the
dollar signs to get past the forum censors.

Cute? Nope. Just something one can do to express an opinion. As if you never utter that word yourself in conversation.

Sure seem like
it, the way you throw out half-truths and unsupported factoids
regarding Nikon's research and development strategies and policies.
Do you really think that I or anyone else with half a brain would
take your word for it

No, I do not expect to be able to reach you, or anyone else like you
with half a brain. I am sorry that I mistook you for someone with a
full brain.

Well, that's a direct insult, yes? Don't recall ever calling you a half-brain. ('cause i didn't). So now you are a hypocrite as well?

that Nikon (or any other major camera
manufacturer) lacks the resources and/or expertise to produce a
viable split-screen focusing system in a modern digital camera?

Despite your half brained state, you're fully aware that is not what
I said. I did say the problems are formidable, and the market demand
not high enough to justify the expenditure to solve them.

Really? I find that attitude on your part disturbing in its
shortsightendess.

As do I, yours.

Ye of little faith... Hey, just saying.

Right.

You strike me as a conformist and reactionary. And please don't take
that as an insult.

If you're saying it, it is an insult. You are nothing but belligerent
and insulting. It is what you desire. It is what you thrive in. You
claim "rudeness and arrogance are invigorating to me". Sir, those are
the word of a deeply disturbed individual.

Sir, you lack the basis upon which to brand me or anyone else with whom you disagree as 'deeply disturbed.' Think about it. Your emotions have apparently obscured your ability to reason and discern. And no, describing someone as a 'conformist' isn't an insult. It's a description of an individual's unwillingness or inability to adapt to changing or modern situations. I am led to believe that you are a conformist given your exhaustive attempts to describe split prism technology (and, I also spot metering) as either irrelevant, unecessary or a 'step back.'

It's simply an honest observation based on your
style and content of posting.

As are my observations on your own style and content. Except that it
is obvious that I have much better powers of observation, and
considerable more honesty, than you.

Obvious to you, perhaps....

Not that you don't have the right to
exspress your opinion..but then don't yell at me for expressing a
contrary one.

I did not "yell" at you. But you also knew that. If being treated to
a small reflection of your own hostility bothers you so much, it is
just a sine of how much help you really need.

"Sine?" Ah, I could ridicule your for a mispelling/typo as you did me for my French faux pas, but then that would be lowering myself to your level...

Cheers, etc.

A false expression of good cheer: what a hypocritical way to conclude
your vile and hostile post.

Me vile and hostile? Youre sense of hyperbole is well developed. And i must respond: "Mr. Kettle, meet Mr Pot."

Seriously, man, why are you so defensive? It's only focusing and metering technology we are discussing here, not your grandmother's cooking. Chill, dude, chill....I bet you take amzing pictures....

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

I simply find your assertion that there is no merit to split prism
focusing in the digital age myopic and narrowminded,

And I find your continual attribution to me of things that I have never said to be repellent and totally disgusting.

Now, it does appear to be your style to manufacturer enemies where there are none, but how do you manufacturer an "assertion that there is no merit to split prism focusing in the digital age" from my multiple posts in this thread supporting the use of split image screens.

I've talked about some of my DSLRs I've fit split image screens to.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=27970637

The relative merits of every third party split image screen on the market, a recap of my own cameras that I've installed them in, and some background on how I was the very first person to cut down screens for the Nikon D70 DSLR, before Katz Eye and Haouda were even in the business.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=27977041

I've gone into their ease of installation, and a recommendation of which one you want to get if you want the type of focus action the original poster described.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=27963150

"assertion that there is no merit to split prism focusing in the digital age"

Dude, get a grip.

Ooooh, you're calling me "dude". I must have really struck a nerve. Radical.

If throwing out a few french phrases gives you
such jolly pleasure, by all mean go for it

Well, dude, it was your tactic originally, so it appears you also derive "jolly pleasure" from it. I just though the linguistic aspects of it were totally tubular.

you won't find me getting all self-congratulatory.

Reread your posts, you're like, totally self congratulatory.

But you do seem easily amused.

Says the man with the match lighting banana lady signature pic.

And
yes, French isn't my language (never said it was) but I wont bore you
with the other three languages I actually am fluent in.

Why not, dude? You don't seem to be the type who ever misses an opportunity to bore someone.

and your
contention that it would be a 'step back' reactionary.

I've done my best to explain the technical issues to you. How is understanding why something was done "reactionary"?

It's that
simple. Because i don't believe (as you seem to believe)

Again your twisted interpretation of what I believe, or "seem to believe".

that
incorporating split prism focusing (without sacrificing other
features that we all hold dear) is really that much of a leap for a
company like Nikon or Canon or Fuji or any of the others.

I have a pretty good idea of how much of a "leap" it is. It involves expending resources that I believe Nikon wouldn't see as resulting in a significant return in investment.

It doesn't matter what you believe, it matters what companies like Nikon, Canon, or Sony believe. And you know how they come to believe whatever it is they believe? Market research. They ask large numbers of people what features they want, then take these big lists of features and ask people how much they're willing to pay for them. They take that and build their business plans, what features to spend the R&D budget on, how much to charge for cameras.

Where do you fit in this picture? By your conduct here it appears you're either a seriously disturbed individual or you've carefully constructed a persona that will insure that no one takes your opinion seriously. You're an object of amusement or pity. You are not a target demographic.

That about sums it up.

Yes, it does.

Given the advances we've seen in just the past 24 months
in digital camera technology, your pessimism seems overblown and
shortsighted.

My pessimism? Dude, that's bogus, based on your continual fabrications.

And history is full of those who said "no, not
possible, ridiculous!' and who then are forced to eat their words. I
think you're one of those.

You are correct: I am one of those who forces people like you to eat your words.

If and when Nikon feels that there is a
demand for that technology, it will happen.

Dude! There is a little glimmering of understanding in there. Woah! Dude, you are such a dude.

Now, here's something for you to ponder...

Do you believe that, if Nikon came across your "Nikon, get off your a$$" comments and your "I forgot to take my meds" attitude, they would be more likely or less likely to feel "that there is a demand for that technology" and to therefore "make it happen".

Ciao, Baby!!

Excellent, dude!

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

Nice summary of the past and present. I'm talking about the future.
I read nothing in your historical survey that would make split prism
technology unworkable, give the desire to accomplish it.

Of course you read nothing "that would make split prism technology unworkable". Because that is not what I said. It is purely your fabrication that I have ever taken such a stance, that I have made an "assertion that there is no merit to split prism focusing in the digital age". You have even called this assertion (that I did not make) "myopic and narrowminded".

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=27978250

For reasons unknown, you feel a need to fabricate an enemy where none exists. I've been putting split image screens in my autofocus cameras for about two decades, put them in digital cameras almost as soon as the "digital age" of which you speak began.

You said "Nice summary of the past and present. I'm talking about the future." How do you take my descriptions of how I've used split image screens in the past and in the present to be a statement that I consider it "unworkable" in the future?

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

Sir, you lack the basis upon which to brand me or anyone else with
whom you disagree as 'deeply disturbed.'

This is correct. Whether or not I disagree with someone is completely independent of whether I consider them to be deeply disturbed. I consider you to be disturbed for quite different reasons, entirely.

Think about it. Your
emotions have apparently obscured your ability to reason and discern.

Sir, it is you who have such a strong need to create an enemy and prolong a battle that you make incredible and insulting fabrications such as:

I simply find your assertion that there is no merit to split prism
focusing in the digital age myopic and narrowminded,

and

Do you really think that I or anyone else with half a brain would
take your word for it - that Nikon (or any other major camera
manufacturer) lacks the resources and/or expertise to produce a
viable split-screen focusing system in a modern digital camera?

I have never said that "there is no merit to split prism focusing", nor have I said that Nikon lacks the resources or expertise to do it.

And that is the basis of my opinion that you are severely disturbed.

How can anyone with reasonable mental processes say that an "assertion that there is no merit to split prism focusing in the digital age" follows, in any logical way, from the fact that I have installed split image focusing screens on every digital SLR and autofocus film SLR I have owned for the last two decades.

Would a sane and reasonable individual believe that someone who has gone to considerable trouble and expense to obtain theses screens if they see "no merit" in them?

Would that sane and reasonable individual believe that a person who finds "no merit to split prism focusing" would not only change screens on his 8008, F100, D2X, and D3, which were designed to allow the user to change a screen, but would also change the screens on a D70, D100, and D200, cameras for which the screen changing procedure is difficult, is best performed with tools not available to the average user;

Would that sane and reasonable individual believe that I, as maker of an "assertion that there is no merit to split prism focusing", would spend considerable time advising hamx15 about the merits of the different split focusing screens that I have used and currently use on my DSLRs.

Or that I would calm his fears about the split image affecting his autofocus system?

Therefore, sir, based on evidence and logic, I conclude that you are not a sane and reasonable individual. I am sorry if that upsets you.

And no, describing someone as a 'conformist' isn't an insult. It's a
description of an individual's unwillingness or inability to adapt to
changing or modern situations. I am led to believe that you are a
conformist given your exhaustive attempts to describe split prism
technology (and, I also spot metering) as either irrelevant,
unecessary or a 'step back.'

And I am led to believe that you are severely disturbed, to be specific, I believe that you are paranoid. I have not made a single attempt, let alone "exhaustive attempts", to describe either the split image screen or spot metering as either irrelevant, unnecessary or a 'step back'.

If your need to manufacture an enemy is so intense that you need to twist truth in this way, then I believe you are a danger to yourself and to others and you require immediate professional help. These are my beliefs. These are my opinions, presented strongly (which you claim believe is a good thing to do).

Seriously, man, why are you so defensive? It's only focusing and
metering technology we are discussing here,

No sir, it is the motivations for your fabrications that we are discussing here, such as your comment that I have made an "assertion that there is no merit to split prism focusing in the digital age".

not your grandmother's
cooking. Chill, dude, chill....I bet you take amzing pictures....

You have accused me of saying things that I didn't say, of opposing things that I advocate. You have called me so many different names that I have lost count.

"Chill, dude, chill" is hardly an appropriate response for the wrongs you have committed.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

Really, your rudeness and arrogance are invigorating to me.

This is not surprising. Since it is you chose to fertilize what was a
civil thread with mounds of rudeness and ignorance, one can only
conclude that this is the environment in which you thrive.

Sir, do not confuse 'mounds of rudeness' with an opinion forcefully
stated.

I assure you, I never confuse such things. However, since it appears that your statement is an assertion that the things you have said are not "mounds of rudeness", then I should point out that you are in most grievous error. You are extremely rude. Now, granted you may just come to this site to blow off steam, and your conduct here may not be representative of how you act in the real world, but I can see you having all sorts of trouble in life because of your intense rudeness. Since you act as if you do not understand what aspects of your behavior actually are rude, maybe I can help in that area.

And your conclusions are based on less that credible
evidence; you should re-examine your critical processes - they are
much too lax.

Sorry, sir, but such a deep criticism as that, of the solidity of someone's mental processes, requires one of two things to lend it validity.

The first would be a well presented and reasoned chain of evidence and argument. This you have not provided. In fact, as I demonstrated in my previous post, your fabrications cast suspicion, not validity, over anything else you say.

The second would be a measure of respect. You have earned none from me. You have not made insightful observations in other areas that would cause me to give credence to your opinion in this area. You post anonymously, which not only does not let me assess your reputation, but also encourages me to judge you as a coward.

But I must ask - are you some kind of apologist for Nikon?

Why "must" you ask? Will your world be incomplete if you do not
manage to get some sort of admission from me? Is everyone who does
not refer to Nikon the way you do, using obscenities, an apologist?

Please, Sir, point out the so-called obscenities that I used.

Well, this is the first time anyone has ever asked me to call them an a$$.

I
think you'll find that referring to the collective derriere of the
Nikon corporation is hardly an obscenity. Unless one is a
reactionary prude (not that i'm calling you that - just an example)

Yes, you continually use that "just an example", "just to say" device.

But hey, I bet you think you're really cute, spelling a$$ with the
dollar signs to get past the forum censors.

Cute? Nope. Just something one can do to express an opinion. As if
you never utter that word yourself in conversation.

Are you unable to believe that someone might have better manners than you do?

Sure seem like
it, the way you throw out half-truths and unsupported factoids
regarding Nikon's research and development strategies and policies.
Do you really think that I or anyone else with half a brain would
take your word for it

No, I do not expect to be able to reach you, or anyone else like you
with half a brain. I am sorry that I mistook you for someone with a
full brain.

Well, that's a direct insult, yes? Don't recall ever calling you a
half-brain. ('cause i didn't).

No, sir. You said that you were part of a group of people possessing only half a brain: "I or anyone else with half a brain". I was merely agreeing with you.

So now you are a hypocrite as well?

You do twist words well. But you have been directly insulting multiple times. My response was quite a reasonable way of dealing with your "either agree with me or admit that you only have half a brain" presentation.

Adding half-hearted retractions like "not that i'm calling you that - just an example" after the insults doesn't make them any less real. It makes you sound like a child on a playground: saying something like "you stink", then smiling and trying to look cute as he says "just kidding", because he realizes that there is about to be retaliation.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Jay Turberville]

Didn't you say the other day that Oly appeared to spot meter with the
AF sensors.

I think we concluded some time ago that one of the Oly cameras must be using AF sensor's for spot metering. I think it was because the spot meter reading wasn't changing at all for quite a few stopes when a legacy manual lens was being stopped down. But I'm not at all sure that this is the case with all Olympus DSLRs.

Have not heard comments about the accuracy or color sensitivity of
Canon, Oly, Pentax, or Sony spot meters, though.

Yes. If you go in with the idea of using the AF sensor that way, then I'd think you can design with that in mind.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[BraveUlysses]

I have a Katze Eye in one E-1 and my nephew in another.

You have your nephew in an E-1? Must be a little chap, eh? : )

--
Rob

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Everyone, everywhere, has to do everything for a first time. There is no shame in failure, only in failure to try.

 

[jfinite]

Wow! I didn't know a post could hold that much text!
--



http://www.pbase.com/jfinite