Manual focus on Canon DSLR

landwomble

landwomble

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,184
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all. I'm finding more and more situations where I'm using manual focus on my 650D. Whether it's low light shots or multiple long exposure on a tripod, I'm using it more. On my old film SLRs the split image focusing prism in the viewfinder made this easy. Live view with zoom isn't the same, especially for fast low light stuff. Now, I believe you can change the focusing screen on the 650D for a similar one. Anyone done this? Do you lose auto focus points? Any downsides?

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Talk Photography Forums mobile app
 
landwomble said:
I believe you can change the focusing screen on the 650D for a similar one.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately not. Focusing screens on the xxxD series of cameras are not interchangeable.
 
StewartR said:
Unfortunately not. Focusing screens on the xxxD series of cameras are not interchangeable.
Click to expand...
Looks tricky but according to this site it can be done. Different screens here

Can't vouch for its authenticity though

Steve
 
Last edited:
I've seen that. In general, has anyone experience of using a split prism in a modern DSLR? what effect does it have on normal AF point selection? I pretty much only use center point anyway

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Talk Photography Forums mobile app
 
Replacing the focussing screen only solves part of the problem. Film SLRs had big, bright, viewfinders compared with the small, dim, ones in crop DSLRs. FF bodies are better in this respect, but I've read that the AF systems leach some light out of the system, and this applied to the AF SLRs too. I don't know if this is true though, but someone else may be able to comment?

I use MF on my 30D occasionally, but my eyes are ageing and it's a challenge. A split image focus aid would probably help, but the Katzeye products are quite expensive and it's not important enough for me to spend this sort of money. The F2 is wonderful though, and the K screen works just fine!
 
landwomble said:
I've seen that. In general, has anyone experience of using a split prism in a modern DSLR? what effect does it have on normal AF point selection? I pretty much only use center point anyway

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Talk Photography Forums mobile app
Click to expand...

It won't effect AF as the af sensor is in font of the mirror. It will effect meter thought as that is in side the view finder.
 
MartynK said:
Replacing the focussing screen only solves part of the problem. Film SLRs had big, bright, viewfinders compared with the small, dim, ones in crop DSLRs. FF bodies are better in this respect, but I've read that the AF systems leach some light out of the system, and this applied to the AF SLRs too. I don't know if this is true though, but someone else may be able to comment?

I use MF on my 30D occasionally, but my eyes are ageing and it's a challenge. A split image focus aid would probably help, but the Katzeye products are quite expensive and it's not important enough for me to spend this sort of money. The F2 is wonderful though, and the K screen works just fine!
Click to expand...
I've said this too, lots when people start saying 'we'll they didn't need AF in the old days'

It misses the point by miles, it's like adding reins to the front of your car so that it can be towed by horses like in the old days.
 
I found live view and zoom really good for obtaining critical focus, a necessity when stacking a 100-400 with a 2x convertor on a crop camera.
 
i think some crop sensor dslrs are penta mirror, and lose light that way too, i have slt so never really looked to much into the older mirror flappers
you could get a flash with ir lamp? where it throws out a pattern, helps alot
 
Phil V said:
I've said this too, lots when people start saying 'we'll they didn't need AF in the old days'

It misses the point by miles, it's like adding reins to the front of your car so that it can be towed by horses like in the old days.
Click to expand...
No you have that wrong.Bad analogy.That implies that auto focus is better than manual in all respects..It's not it's just different and fails in many respects.I and others find it an unnecessary hindrance being unable to manually focus.I don,t want alternatives like live view. I just want DSLR's to manually focus like proper cameras used to. There are to many gimmicks and rubbish on these DSLR's now and they haven't even got the basics of being able to focus manually!
 
kestral said:
No you have that wrong.Bad analogy.That implies that auto focus is better than manual in all respects..It's not it's just different and fails in many respects.I and others find it an unnecessary hindrance being unable to manually focus.I don,t want alternatives like live view. I just want DSLR's to manually focus like proper cameras used to. There are to many gimmicks and rubbish on these DSLR's now and they haven't even got the basics of being able to focus manually!
Click to expand...

You could just spend £75 on a Panasonic G1 and then you'll enjoy manual lenses (but at x2 "crop") with the ease of being able to focus through the EVF at increased magnification with WYSIWYG. Or, go the whole hog and get a Sony A7, like I've just done :D
 
kestral said:
No you have that wrong.Bad analogy.That implies that auto focus is better than manual in all respects..It's not it's just different and fails in many respects.I and others find it an unnecessary hindrance being unable to manually focus.I don,t want alternatives like live view. I just want DSLR's to manually focus like proper cameras used to. There are to many gimmicks and rubbish on these DSLR's now and they haven't even got the basics of being able to focus manually!
Click to expand...
I'm afraid you misunderstand my answer, and are so far into the problem that you refuse to accept the reason the problem exists.

Manual focus on a DSLR isn't difficult because the manufacturers are incapable of making it work. That's the wrong way round.

In order to create a working phase detect AF system, the camera makers chose to steal some light from the viewfinder, to make their highly complex and efficient metering systems work they implemented a plain ground glass focussing screen, to give us affordable DSLRs they used sensors smaller than the legacy film cameras, in order to make DSLRs really cheap they gave us the less efficient pentamirrors. Add the short focus throw on the lenses and looser focus rings, which make AF quick and efficient and that's where your frustration is born. A small dark viewfinder, no split screen and fiddly focus rings.

I was still shooting MF exclusively long after most photographers were shooting AF (up to 2001). However, because it's not that long since I stopped doing that, I can also tell you that my 7d and top line Canon lenses beat my manual focussing by about 500% in almost every situation. Sure they'll fail sometimes, but generally that's when MF would have been tricky too, and if I add in the ability to throw an AF assist light we're at AF almost never failing.

To give you a quality MF experience like you had in the old days, you'd have your old MF camera with a sensor, it's not as simple as changing the focus screen.

To add to the frustration most people also shoot with slow zooms meaning even less light for the viewfinder.
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
I can also tell you that my 7d and top line Canon lenses beat my manual focussing by about 500% in almost every situation. Sure they'll fail sometimes, but generally that's when MF would have been tricky too, and if I add in the ability to throw an AF assist light we're at AF almost never failing.
Click to expand...

I agree with this statement 100%. However, I have a number of manual lenses which I enjoy using on my 7D, but for focus accuracy and speed, they will never match the autofocus lenses.

I think it also depends on what camera you are using. For example, my previous camera, a 450D had a front focus issue with all of my autofocus lenses, but with the 7D, this problem doesn't exist. It was one of the first things I checked when I got the 7D, due to the micro adjust facility, which was never required.
 
I'd disagree with AF always being more accurate as AF will focus quickly on something but that something may not be what you want although DoF can hide a lot.

For the most accurate focus I'd say that a magnified live view and MF will almost certainly always beat AF because the user is able to decide where the point of focus is much more accurately than with any AF system but of course the penalty is time.
 
woof woof said:
I'd disagree with AF always being more accurate as AF will focus quickly on something but that something may not be what you want
Click to expand...

I saw this article and thought of this thread :)

http://petapixel.com/2013/12/11/lions-eagles-snow-fun-ive-ever-shooting-nfl-game/


I like manual focus - I find I engage better with the scene than when I'm using AF. For most of what I do focusing speed is not a priority.

Phil has a fair point, though; modern DSLRs and lenses are not set up for it and you're fighting with the camera to not use AF.

High resolution sensors are rather less forgiving of poor focus technique, too, especially if you're examining your pictures at 100%. With medium format film cameras, you usually have a very large, clear finder that makes establishing critical focus much easier.

Like Alan, I'm abandoning the DSLR and I've bought a Sony A7 to use with dedicated MF lenses.
 
Last edited:
i think dslr ground glass also is optimised for slower lenses, than back in the day, so you dont really see the true shallow depth of field of say a 1.8 ?
 
pingu666 said:
i think dslr ground glass also is optimised for slower lenses, than back in the day, so you dont really see the true shallow depth of field of say a 1.8 ?
Click to expand...
This too.
 
Phil V said:
I can't see what you've found to disagree with, no-one said it was always more accurate.:shrug:
Click to expand...

Well, just in case you suffer short term memory loss :D what you said was...

Phil V said:
I can also tell you that my 7d and top line Canon lenses beat my manual focussing by about 500% in almost every situation. Sure they'll fail sometimes, but generally that's when MF would have been tricky too, and if I add in the ability to throw an AF assist light we're at AF almost never failing.
Click to expand...

And my commecnt which wasn't especially aimed at you was...

woof woof said:
I'd disagree with AF always being more accurate as AF will focus quickly on something but that something may not be what you want although DoF can hide a lot.

For the most accurate focus I'd say that a magnified live view and MF will almost certainly always beat AF because the user is able to decide where the point of focus is much more accurately than with any AF system but of course the penalty is time.
Click to expand...
And to expand on what I meant, just for you...

Auto focus is fast and it'll focus on something and DoF hides a lot but if you want to look really really closely you may start to question AF. AF is after all not a 100% hit rate thing and it doesn't know what you want it to focus on, not exactly.

On Canon's web site what they say is that if you take three shots you'll see focus differences beteween each and that this is perfectly notmal. Not to single Canon out as I'm pretty sure that other manufacturers would say the same thing if they were feeling honest. This of course conflicts with those who claim that their own body and lens combo nails the shot every time and of course it doesn't, not exactly, but what it does is make a pretty good stab at it, a stab that'll probably look good... but then there's the number of people complaining about front/back/ inconsistancy etc especially at wider apertures where the DoF isn't there to hide little focus misses so all is not always sweatness and light with AF.

AF is very probably the best option if time is a factor but if you have the luxury of having plenty of time these days there is an option that I believe will be more acurate than AF and it's magnified live view :D with which you can pick your point of focus at f0.95 along the length of an eye lash :D

I doubt that any focus system can beat the accuracy which is possible with a magnified veiw and live view but of course this takes time.
 
Manual focus is a doddle on sony SLT's but live view is implemented so well. I love manual focus it makes me engage more at least with static subjects....
 
woof woof said:
Well, just in case you suffer short term memory loss :D what you said was...



And my commecnt which wasn't especially aimed at you was...
.
Click to expand...
There y go, if you look closely I never said always, I said almost always. We don't disagree, you just want to tell me I'm wrong.:thinking:

I'll say it again. No-one in this thread has said that AF is infallible. The point of my post wasn't how wonderful AF is, it was that an AF system designed in the 80s created cameras that are difficult to MF, that was done by design. Not (as the point I was debating) that manufacturers could design cameras that allowed MF.

Kestrel doesn't want fancy tricks, he doesn't want magnified live view, focus peaking or any of that modern nonsense, he wants what he had in the old days. And as you and I both know - he can't have it, by design.
 
My car doesn't have reigns but it does have a tow hook... ;-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top