my 50mm lens, and autumn Options

[SoloRiver]

Manual focus isn't as hard as you think it is. And even if you never get fast at it, it adds a slow, deliberative element to photography that is a good thing, in my opinion. It's one thing to just point and autoshoot a burst of continuous shots, and quite another to have a selected series of photos that you know you spotted, composed, and made -- each one by itself. I don't know if that makes any sense, but my percentage of keepers with my more "limited" equipment is MUCH higher than when I'm shooting with the D300.

The Nikon 50/1.4 is a very, very nice lens. I only wish that it weren't a 75mm on a DX sensor, because for me that's just too long, but that does make it a nice shorter portrait lens. It's quite inexpensive. It was really hard to find for a while but I don't know if that's still true. Another option on a Nikon, which is not as fast but is a more normal focal length on a DX sensor is the 35/2.

[sandra s.]

I might have missed it, but what kind of camera are you shooting with?

Nikon D60, since this spring. I'm very happy with it!

I have an old non-auto focus Minolta 250mm mirror lens that fits using an adapter and even requires manual speed adjustment (as a mirror, it's fixed aperture). That's manual for you, though not quite as manual my first serious camera, a Russian Leica rip-off, that didn't even have an built-in exposure meter.

Ah yes, the meter...I forgot that. My camera doesn't quite "get" the 50mm lens in that respect. Its suggestions are always far higher exposures than I want (with the kit lens they're spot on). But of course that's easy to get used to and not the same thing as not having one at all.

Manual focus per se isn't hard for me, but FAST manual focus is a different matter . I think I'll be using and loving that lens for a long time though, so I might eventually get round to it...
When it's dark, or when I'm getting tired, it gets harder, especially with a very shallow DOF. When I know it's getting wonky I usually take several shots (re-focusing each one) and hope for a winner among them .

[Anda]

You know what my problem is with the manual focus? I don't always trust my eye !

I wear contact lenses - and the first time I got them, a couple of years ago, I had to go back and ask for a different brand because the Bausch and Lomb ones were making all my pictures fuzzy - I swear! I had just gotten the 50mm lens and I was playing with manual focus and it was hell to find the perfect adjustment for the dioptric setting - there's a little wheel to the side of the camera on Canon Rebels, with NO markings on it, and of course I had adjusted it for my vision without contacts (poor), and I just couldn't find the correct adjustment after I gotten contacts. I tried a different brand of contacts and thank god that was better.

It is still my biggest fear - that I inadvertently will move the dioptric adjustment with one position (it's happened too many times - while placing or taking my camera in/from the camera bag) and then I end up with ridiculously out of focus shots because my eyes are seeing something that's not there. That's why I rely on autofocus

I wish I could just freeze that stupid dioptric adjustment in place and leave it there - or if it had some sort of markings on it so I can put it back in place - I am thinking of making my own marks on that plastic wheel....

[sandra s.]

I have contact lenses too, and on my old Finepix I was completely unable to focus manually. I don't know why but on the D60 I can do it.

I am thinking of making my own marks on that plastic wheel....

I'd do exactly that!

I just met a professional photographer with a bigger Nikon who waggled his long lenses under my nose...sigh...so the notion of a Christmas lens is carefully scratching on my door again. He was nice though, and said he'd give me some tips if I wanted them, in December when he'll have more time. Of course I want them!

[JohnLloydJones]

You know what my problem is with the manual focus? I don't always trust my eye !

Ah, in the bad old days, your SLR screen would have an area with microprisms that split the image when it was out of focus. Modern autofocus DSLRs no longer have that (at least I don't know of an that does), so manual focus is harder now.

[Bill Fosher]

Back when I was working as a journalist and did a bit of my own photography for the newspapers I had more camera bodies than lenses. I found that three fixed-length lenses were all I needed -- I put the money into speed and precision glass, not zooms. For my Nikon 35 mm bodies (an F and three Nikkormats) I had a 28 f/1.8 and 50 f/1.2 and a 105 f/1.8. Yes, my camera bag weighed about 400 pounds. I didn't do any sports photography, for which I would have needed a longer lens, but other than that I never found a situation where I was saying, geeze, I wish I had some other lens. Mulitiple bodies allowed me to have multiple films loaded at all times, and at least one of the Nikkormats was always at the shop, it seemed.

Since being dragged into the digital age, DW must have a zoom lens, so that's what we have. I find I almost always use it at one extreme of the focal range or the other, which is where the optics are the worst. I hate it. Maybe I'd hate it less if I used it in the middle, but I doubt it. Plus it's a Canon, so the optics are a step down from what I was used to.

[Anda]

Plus it's a Canon, so the optics are a step down from what I was used to.

Not all Canons are created equally. Get an L lens and problem solved My 70-200 f/4L has constant results from one end to the other of the range. And that's a cheap L.

[SoloRiver]

I've been impressed by Canon L optics (although sometimes I don't care for the look they give pictures they are definitely very sharp) but it's the Canon haptics I am not crazy about -- I prefer the feel of Nikon bodies and lenses, they seem much more solid and better made and the controls make more sense to me. That said, arguing Canon vs. Nikon is sort of like arguing Toyota vs. Honda.

Something else that helps a great deal with manual focus is the size of the viewfinder. Consumer dSLRs often have very small viewfinders (my D70s viewfinder is like looking through a periscope) but higher end models (like the D300) have larger brighter viewfinders that don't make me squint so much. My Olympus OM-1, which is a film camera, has an enormous viewfinder (I think the magnification is actually 1.0) that is a real pleasure to look through. That said, none of the SLRs hold a candle to the viewfinder or ease of focus that I have in my Leica M3, but then you're getting into rangefinders and that's something that will either really appeal to you (totally different system from an SLR, and there are no affordable digital models so you'd be stuck with film unless you like spending over $10,000 on a camera and one lens) or won't appeal to you at all.

[Bill Fosher]

I have never owned a Leica rangefinder, but I used one for a month. Oh, sweet jeezis what a camera.

It was probably 25 years ago, but I still get weak in the knees remembering it. I had it for 30 wonderful days. I think I shot 900 rolls of flim that month, just to hear the shutter go *click* the way that only a Leica rangefinder goes *click*

Sigh. I wish I was a good enough photographer to justify owning one, but for now I will just have to look at Melanie's flickr account every so often and recognize the ones that were made with the M3. And yes, I can.

[SoloRiver]

Hey Bill:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Leica-M3-Single-Stroke...=item27acefe4ad

Super clean, serial number almost 1,000,000, seller has 100% positive feedback. Looks like a pretty good price; I've been offered more for mine and mine isn't as clean as this one. I'm just sayin'.

[storminthenight]

WOW, beautiful pictures, and Kyla is like a black version of my girl Sakari, its insane how similar they look, they could be sisters. So of course I think Kyla is just the prettiest

[Bill Fosher]

Melanie,

Sigh. I'm looking at a ram that costs nearly that much, but which I could actually use well. Of course, he doesn't go *click*. I like the fact that the seller mentions the sound. She or he knows how to reel them in. John Cusak's line in High Fidelity comes to mind: "Fetish properties are not unlike porn ... I'd feel bad about taking their money if I weren't -- well -- sorta one of them."