Re: still more shutter delay nonsense

[fconley <fconley@macconnect.com>]

I'd like to back Harrison up on this. In not only news and sports 
shooting, but in modeling and some studio work as well I have found that 
the Canon EOS system lenses focus amazingly fast and accurately. I think 
that in terms of covering fast moving sports like basketball and 
football, the delay you should worry about is not the camera's response 
time, but your own realization of what is happening. Many a time I have 
looked at the series of negatives produced around an excellent shot while 
using a motor drive and have noticed my manual focusing catching up with 
the action. Sports photography is highly instinctual, and I've found that 
if you simply let your eye and trigger finger do the work, you'll be 
amazed by the results. There are many a football picture in my portfolio 
that I didn't "see" consciously enough to describe the scene that I was 
going to photograph, but my mind knew when to take the shot.

I've also found this to be true with relatively slow paced work like 
modeling shoots. I shoot in a very loose style, with a great deal of 
participation on the part of the models. There's a moment when it all 
looks right, and I simply take the shot. It's just a process that happens 
in a part of the brain that works faster than our consciousness.

The mechanics of the camera, I have found, play little part in the 
process of my taking pictures. I learn whatever system I have, whether 
it's a Leica, a Nikon, or a Canon, and those mechanical details fall 
quickly away when I'm actually in the process of shooting. Like Harrison, 
I tend to manual focus action. But I do so not because the autofocus 
isn't fast enough, but simply because my mind is often more aware than my 
consciousness of where I need to focus, and if I just let my brain do the 
work it knows how to do, things come out better. The restriction of 
autofocus is that it makes you think a little more about your shot so 
that you can actually show the camera where you need to focus. With 
systems like the EOS, the lenses follow focus, and focus fast enough to 
easily accomodate a five-frames-per-second motor drive (an 10 fps on the 
new EOS-1N). Unless you buy a really cheapo autofocus camera, focusing 
speed should *not* be an issue, no matter how fast the action you're 
trying to capture is.

My two cents. ;) 

- --Frank


>>Ted & Harrison,
>>
>>Have you ever used an AF SLR? I don't think you realize how long the
>>delay is. I'm not talking non-AF SLR vs. rangefinder. I'm talking manual
>>focus versus some of the slower AF cameras, where you push the button,
>>wait for the camera to focus, then it takes the picture when it's ready.
>>
>>With a manual focus camera, yes, you follow focus and you anticipate the
>>moment you want. That is the whole point of what John Lowther was saying.
>>This is good. Focusing all at once just before taking the picture is bad,
>>but this is the only option some AF cameras give you.
>>
>>- Paul
>
>Paul,
>
>Yes I currently use the Canon EOS system and I must tell you it focuses
>faster than I ever could and I used to shoot pro sports for the national
>media.  The AF cameras you are speaking of are what I refered to as the
>amature cameras in my response.  I'll admit those things are annoying as
>**** and I try to avoid using them as they make my blood pressure go up.  I
>used to use Leica R-6es and I notice no difference in the responsiveness of
>the R6 and the EOS 1.  Of course I still manually focus most action
>eventhough this system probably does as good as I do.  I just don't trust
>those electronic things, like I still use full manual eventhough I have
>several auto modes avaliable, if the picture is screwed up I want to know
>it was my fault not the camera's!
>
>Harrison McClary
>hmphoto@delphi.com
>http://people.delphi.com/hmphoto
>
>Harrison McClary
>http://people.delphi.com/hmphoto
>
>