Simon Worby wrote:
>Which is why I wonder what makes people "corner"
>themselves by buying cameras that won't allow them to focus manually...
>
I swore I wouldn't reply to this thread again, but I am weak and you
keep saying things like "won't allow them to focus manually".
THAT SIMPLY ISN'T TRUE!
It is true that they are more difficult to focus manually with wider
angle and slower lenses than are full frame SLRS. As with any SLRs, the
ability to focus manually is partially dependent on the eyesight and
expertise of the user. I previously posted a link to some images I took
with a D60 when I was investigating this very question for myself. I
didn't even have an AF lens at hand when I did these. I politely
declined the loan of one in order to keep my attention on the use of and
results from OM mount lenses, my main concern at the time. And I submit
that they are all properly focused, with the plane of focus right where
I wanted it. And my keeper rate was quite high.
Once I had the 300D, I took quite a few shots with MF lenses, again with
acceptable to excellent results, about what I get with an OM body.
Also, I am not in the least "cornered", as I still have an (over)full
complement of OM bodies and lenses. In fact, I consider myself less
cornered, as I now have a tool which I can do things the OMs cannot,
just as they do some things better than the DSLR.
In your one, brief, encounter with a 300D, you mentioned that the
horrible, plasticky lens might not have even been a Can*n lens. Have you
considered the possibility that you are judging the camera body, and all
other DSLRs, based on a piece of junk lens that may not focus properly
on any body?
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|