Focussing Screens

[Harlequin565]

So I recently had a bit of a disaster fun trying to use my FD 135 f/2.8 for cat portraits. It didn't really work.

A good deal of my 35mm manual focus work is static subjects. For human portraits it's a "don't move" instruction whilst I focus and shoot. Cats though - don't listen and f/5.6 at 135mm still has a relatively shallow depth of field at close distances.

On MF, I tend to flip up the magnifier - apart from the 645n which has AF, so this is a 35mm format issue. MF I'm sorted.

I actually find the rangefinder patch so much easier to use than the SLR offerings. I have pretty poor eyesight. I need glasses for driving, different glasses for screen work and for close distance I have to go without.

However I wondered if perhaps my issue is the focussing screen? The particular version I have is the F-1n. I have the split microprism (E) screen: http://www.canon-photography.com/accessory-focus-screens.htm

Does anyone else have this issue, or is it just me? I'd like a nice 35mm portrait setup that I can get reliable results with *relatively* quickly. I know I can go AF with either Nikon or Canon EOS (would be starting from scratch with either system), but I wondered if perhaps I was "doing it wrong" with what I have. It doesn't feel like rangefinders were really designed for portraits, but at this point, I'm thinking of picking up a 90 or 135 in M mount "just to see". Sync speed is pants though.

 

[FishyFish]

So I recently had a bit of a disaster fun trying to use my FD 135 f/2.8 for cat portraits. It didn't really work.

A good deal of my 35mm manual focus work is static subjects. For human portraits it's a "don't move" instruction whilst I focus and shoot. Cats though - don't listen and f/5.6 at 135mm still has a relatively shallow depth of field at close distances.

On MF, I tend to flip up the magnifier - apart from the 645n which has AF, so this is a 35mm format issue. MF I'm sorted.

I actually find the rangefinder patch so much easier to use than the SLR offerings. I have pretty poor eyesight. I need glasses for driving, different glasses for screen work and for close distance I have to go without.

However I wondered if perhaps my issue is the focussing screen? The particular version I have is the F-1n. I have the split microprism (E) screen: http://www.canon-photography.com/accessory-focus-screens.htm

Does anyone else have this issue, or is it just me? I'd like a nice 35mm portrait setup that I can get reliable results with *relatively* quickly. I know I can go AF with either Nikon or Canon EOS (would be starting from scratch with either system), but I wondered if perhaps I was "doing it wrong" with what I have. It doesn't feel like rangefinders were really designed for portraits, but at this point, I'm thinking of picking up a 90 or 135 in M mount "just to see". Sync speed is pants though.

Your problem isn’t down to focusing screens, camera type, or your eyesight. Your problem is that you are trying to photograph a cat.

Cats have camera sensing abilities at a seemingly genetic level. This allows them to turn their head away at the precise moment of shutter activation, or to walk within the minimum focus distance of an autofocus lens as you line up the shot.

 

[Harlequin565]

Cat has more patience than my wife....

 

[Asha]

Your problem isn’t down to focusing screens, camera type, or your eyesight. Your problem is that you are trying to photograph a cat. [emoji1]

Cats have camera sensing abilities at a seemingly genetic level. This allows them to turn their head away at the precise moment of shutter activation, or to walk within the minimum focus distance of an autofocus lens as you line up the shot.

THIS!

I gave up ages ago trying to capture my cats on film yonks ago.
Even now using a mobile phone, most images are only good for deletion!
Time to return to home movies on super 8 of course for us in f&c [emoji6]

 

[StephenM]

You could try using a waist level finder as with a medium format camera. The issue could be your eyesight. If I remember correctly, the apparent distance of the focusing screen isn't what it was in the 60s; pentaprisms then had the image at infinity, and I found a waist level finder better as I'm short sighted.

If the finders on the F1n are the same as the original F1, I could loan you a waist level finder and a UKIP finder (Canon called them the speed finder, but as it swivels it make me think of the nice Mr Cameron's description of UKIP voters as swivel eyed loons so I call it a UKIP finder).

For the record, I don't agree with the nice Mr Cameron. On very many things...

 

[StephenM]

P.S. Our cats are well behaved, and I have a photo of one in a light tent. Admittedly, I was actually trying to photograph the object I had placed in the light tent, but honestly what could possibly make a greater picture than a cat together with a piece of photographic equipment?

Every photo since has been an anticlimax

 

[Asha]

Without wishing to detour the thread too much, sorry Ian!
The fact that cats are quick to move in order to avoid correct focusing of photographic equipment, how come when we need them to move, like just a moment ago when some sort of large millipede type critter took a stroll pass my armchair, they pretend to be fast asleep and refuse to earn their keep and hunt!! [emoji23]

 

[Harlequin565]

If the finders on the F1n are the same as the original F1

Very generous of you Stephen as I was thinking of a WLF. The speed finder looks interesting too. Sadly the internet says that F1 finders are not interchangeable. Original F1 and new F1 won't play nice

I do think it's my eyesight, because I'm looking through the viewfinder asking myself "is that in focus?" It's just not clear to me. Rangefinder is absolutely simple (unless fences).

And joking aside, I know cats aren't the best example. But they're a good example of something that moves irrationally - rather than BIF or other fast moving targets which require a whole nother level of skill I don't posess.

 

[StephenM]

Just checking - from what I just DuckDuckGod, the Canon F1 and F1n look as if they take the same finders. It was the New F1 (bizarre naming there, made for confusion) that was different. So if you have the F1n, the finders should fit.