"Christopher Loffredo" <Speleo_karstNeuter_Spammers@yahoo.com>

wrote in message news:btupdp$bhd2c$1@ID-9421.news.uni-berlin.de...

> Matt Clara wrote:

> > I've had them for 4 years now and only just this year bought a camera that

> > autofocus' worth a damn (F100). Even with the f100, when focus needs to be

> > achieved quickly, I don't mess around with autofocus as you can't trust it

> > to focus on exactly what you want it to.

> So what the **** is the point of autofocus????

Good question!!! ;-)

If it were not for the loss of sharp vision in the center

of my "camera" eye, I would not ever use it - a good

matte viewing screen in a camera with good VF optics

is both easier and faster to use than AF most of the time,

and, I think, generally more accurate - and it does not

force "center of view" focus (yuh, you can switch AF

focus to *specific* alternative points in the field in some

cameras, but this is not a fast, intuitive operation the

way off-center MF focus can be), which introduces

rotational errors in focus with short FL lenses when the

focus point and framing-placement of that point are different.

Fortunately the reasonably-good-at-acceptably-fast-AF

F100 arrived in time for me - the earlier versions of AF were

inadequate. I think the buying public is sold a lot of features

in photo gear that are unnecessary or even disadvantageous

(compact VF systems have linear distortion and soft edges,

light weight gear makes steady shooting harder, incremental

exposure-control shifts makes exact exposure control

impossible, etc.), but that is the nature of marketing...;-)

Newer is not necessarily better, though!

--

David Ruether

d_ruether@hotmail.com

http://www.David-Ruether-Photography.com