[Closed] camera q again: do (or how do) af points affect manual focus?

AF points don't have any effect on the focus when manually focussing.
When using manual focus the focus indicator light still comes on to tell you when the selected AF area is in focus, but that is really just a handy assist.
I think, depending on your settings the AF point still alters auto-exposure. e.g. If you are using spot-metering then (I think) it uses the AF point as "the spot".

Having multiple AF points is mainly useful when using AF (naturally).

The focus and recompose method is useful but can be a pain when your subject is moving, whereas AF-C mode will keep them in focus. Also if you focus then recompose then your exposure will be locked on the thing you focussed on, so may be incorrect. (you can change a custom setting to decouple the autofocus lock from the auto-exposure lock to prevent this).

What GrahamS said...

Fontmoss, did you get your lens in the end? I've just got a Sigma 18-200 (Nikon fit) if you want to meet up and have a beer and a play with it...

hello again! i cant find your email add 🙁 mine is in my profile, fire me a mail and we'll hook up if you're about this week. aye bring cameras,lenses and any bike associated paraphernalia

ta mr s too

i should also ask if either of you have a flickr account? im in need of direction/advice/criticism and some of the 'rate me' groups seem pretty crap at times

[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/fontmoss/ ]flickr[/url]

Sadly I'm all talk and no trousers fontmoss. 😐

I'm a natural geek so I understand all the technical left-brain stuff, but my composition and arty skills are rubbish (which is why I took it up in the first place - to expand my right brain).

but what about when focusing manually?

if you'll pardon me for stating the bleeding obvious, you DO realise that 'manual' focussing implies you use your [b]eyes[/b] to do it ?

lol yup but wanted to know when the camera registers a 'focus' ie the wee dot appears then what does it base it on?

plus i have pants eyes and find it tough to tell when im tryin to get the foreground in focus and bokeh thereafter, maybe a dof preview would help

mr s, i dont believe you, let us see your stream!

fontmoss ygm

if you want people to rate your pictures, just post 'em up here. You can always link directly back to your picture on flickr.

mr s, i dont believe you, let us see your stream!

No really - I'm poo.

The other issue is that, as an eternal procrastinator, I don't actually have many pics online.
(maybe if I spent less time on forums and more time playing with my pics then I might :))

You're more than welcome to have a browse through my Picasa albums at http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/dalmutinet but I promise you that you won't find any high art there.

No really - I'm poo.

I don't know about that: your masterpiece [url= http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/dalmutinet/ElarexFishingReel# ]Elarex Fishing Reel[/url] is, quite frankly, inspiring.

[url= http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/dalmutinet/ElarexFishingReel#5152723674689193202 ]This[/url] twisted, Joker-like face - shocking.

[url= http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/dalmutinet/ElarexFishingReel#5152723687574095122 ]What length a piece of string?[/url]

A [url= http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/dalmutinet/ElarexFishingReel#5152723666099258578 ]riff[/url] on [url= http://www.ascii.cl/htmlcodes.htm ]HTML codes[/url]?

😀

LOL. Yeah - eBay pics I took for my dad. It's an antique y'know. 🙂

plus i have pants eyes and find it tough to tell when im tryin to get the foreground in focus and bokeh thereafter, maybe a dof preview would help

What you see in the viewfinder is always at maximum aperture (unless you are using a fully manual lens) so a DOF preview will only ever stop the lens [u]down[/u] to your selected aperture which extends the DOF to what you are actually taking.

In other words, if you find it tough to judge what is in focus normally, then a DOF preview won't help. (A bigger viewfinder image might though - either via a new camera body or by using a magnifying eyepiece).

ok, i thought using a dof preview would make it clearer what was in focus

so mr geek tell me about split prism screens?

You got me there. I know [url= http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/ ]Katz Eye[/url] make them for the D40. Something to do with it showing a split-image and when it is in focus the two images will line up correctly. But I've never used one or even seen one in action.

Sounds a bit like a rangefinder to me.

One of the old-skoolers might be able to help.

yeah had a look and not sure how id get on with it

hmm i shall have a shot of mates dof preview see what it does for me.

thinkin bout a fixed 24mm old nikon lens next as cant afford a sigma 18-50 f2.8 but any recommendations or suggestions welcome-im more interested in portrait and low light stuff than having a zoom (though id like to get something like the f2.8 80-200 nikon or even the cheapish 55-200 at some stage)

Take it you already have a 50mm f1.8? If not then you might want to get one as they are cheap and great portrait lenses (though I don't know if it will autofocus on a D40, you may need to get the more expensive AFS one for that)

hmm i shall have a shot of mates dof preview see what it does for me.

If you are anything like me then your response will be "Oooh it's gone all dark."

lol, yeah used the dof for first time earlier and that was indeed the reaction but ill give it a proper whirl soon

yeah got a 50 1.8 albeit an e series old school one (very nice build tho, metal and everyfink)

the 2.8 nikon 24-85 looks nice, so many lenses so little time! ill prob go for a 24 fixed until i can save up some cash for something in the 300 quid range, 24-85 would probably be a more useful range than 18-50 tbh

The focus points on the cameras help as as long as its bright enough for the camera to pick up the focus, itll beep and highlight the area. This essentially replaced the split prism (old skool) way of working as it enables you to get a better control over where you focus. The problem with it is if you have poor eyesight or have the diopter adjuster badly then it will never seem in focus.

Also in Manual focus you dont have the red AF assist beam you do on Automatic focus so in low light its harder to focus anyway. The split prism screen is a good idea but again is only as good as the light thats coming through the lens. As somone mentioned a depth of field preview button acts to give you a true understanding of the depth of field.

Magnified eye pieces are a good way of sorting out focusing but often they cut off the coverage you can actually see.

Doug

ta doug, havin played with camera again i wonder if im relying too heavily on 'registering' a focus with the camera. i shall endeavour to find out

get one of [url= http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/NEW-Nikon-AF-S-DX-18-55mm-18-55-ED-II-lens-D60-D80-D90_W0QQitemZ170300396629QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_CamerasPhoto_CameraAccessories_CameraLensesFilters_JN?hash=item170300396629&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1683|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A1318 ]these[/url]

i put my old type 1 18-55 on the wife's D40x and the results are stunning. i'm considering getting another one to go on the D300 as i'm always a bit disappointed with the 18-200mm in that range. i know it's not f2.8 but the D40 has pretty good performance at slightly higher ISO speeds

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mrmichaelwright/

ive got one mr wright-thats the one i was going to sell to you 🙂
id be interested to hear what you think of the d300 though, esp in comparison to d40

new 35mm af-s lens released looks interesting, tho ill prob stick to cheap(er) and cheerful old school fixed lenses for now

ah 😳

missed the forum name 🙂

as for D300/D40

well it's really a whole different ball park.

Often i think the mistake people make is too get too hung up on the camera body. lets face it, the D40 is superior to the D1h which was a pro level camera not too long ago!

i upgraded from a D70 for the following reasons:

gadget creep
that screen, it really is very nice
low light/high ISO performance
fps
image processing, it really does produce some fabulous images, the image processing is very close to that of the D3
Nikon creative lighting system compatibility
weight/build, the D70 is too compact to feel balanced with a bigger lens

it was shiny.......

the D40x i got for my wife is really rather nice, seems to have fantastic colour reproduction.

The D300 is, to all intents and purposes a D3 with a smaller chip and less dust/weather proofing as well as a few other pro level bits that i don't require. I only wish Nikon would bring out an f2.8 wide angle zoom for apsc cameras

Often i think the mistake people make is too get too hung up on the camera body

We the differences D40/D60 or D200/D300 may be marginal, but I see a huge difference between my D60 and D300 (and not just in weight!). The D40 may be [b]better[/b] than the D60, as the latter seems to spend AGES writing to the memory card, even with a fast card, so the extra megapixels may slug it. I have a 30Mb/sec Extreme III card in my D40 but if you take a burst of shots it slows to a crawl 🙁

yeah i had thought about getting a d80 because it'd be easier to alter settings, use more lenses autofocus and the ability to use it in lower light
but now thinking im better buying lenses and saving up for something a bigger leap from d40 than d80 so see a real jump in continuous shooting, viewfinder etc. and as mr wright says newer cameras are awesome compared to older pro issue cameras not to mention cameras and lenses from back in the day

D80 user here and having played with my mum's D40 I'd say it is already quite a leap.

D90 is out now too remember.

yeah d80 would be nice, although d40 is mine and my gfs, hmmm

d90 is beyond the budget for now

btw is there a big difference between a 24 and 28mm fixed lens, id assume not but thought id ask?

yeah d80 would be nice, although d40 is mine and my gfs, hmmm

Perfect: "I decided to get my own camera so you don't always have to share yours with me darling".

btw is there a big difference between a 24 and 28mm fixed lens, id assume not but thought id ask?

A 24mm gives you an field of view of 52.4° horizontally and 36.4° vertically (61.2° diagonal)
A 28mm gives you 45.7° by 31.5° (53.8° diagonal).

So yeah there are a few degrees in it.

Don't you have the 18-55mm kit lens for the D40? If so then just try it at those two focal lengths. It won't be as a sharp as a prime obviously, but it will illustrate the different coverage.

Nikon have just released an 35mm F1.8 G AF-S DX lens, which might also be a nice choice. Should RRP at around £199.

saw the 35 but for the sake of auto focus its prob a bit much for me, an old AI 24 or 28 lense lets me play around with a cheaper lense until i really know what ranges and lengths i use.

ive played with 24 and 28 on the 17-55, doesnt seem a huge dif but maybe ill plump for 24.

Perfect: "I decided to get my own camera so you don't always have to share yours with me darling".

now this is i like! shame money was motivation for splitting the cost, plus a new from shop camera has warranty..

I have a D40 and the great all purpose 18-200 lens. The camera is much, much better than me 🙂

I use a SB600 flash, and for indoor people pics can't rate it highly enough as it is generally used bounced.

COnks

thats the sort of moderating view i need! yup d40 def a great camera, need a cold shower to stop thinkin bout others

Just looked on eBay and there is a D80 body going for £250.

Goan.. you know you want to...

oh i forgot to mention the D300s performance with poor quality optics, for some unknown reason(even by the experts) it has an ability to virtually eliminate chromatic aberrations on very wide lenses, even my cheap russian 8mm fisheye

for some unknown reason

not unknown to the designers 🙂

yup stuck my singlecross frame on classifieds!

still, think might hang fire with d40-set up function button to adjust ISO, white balance is impressive left on auto and i dont really need a wee lcd to show me settings (im going to ignore ability to auto focus with more lenses and better performance at ISO 1600!)

not unknown to the designers

apparently it is!

and theyve admitted that? youd want to keep that quiet

"and it eliminates errors from crap lenses."

"wow thats incredible, how?"

*shrugs shoulders*

think ill stick with d40, maybe buy afs 50mm if really feel need for auto and save the pennies for an uber body like 300 or whatevers on a good deal in 6 months

The only thing I really miss on my D60 is auto-bracketing, if I'd read the spec before buying I might have gone for something else...

oh no

just played with a d80. its nice.

so now theres: auto bracketing as mogrim said, better results at ISO 1600, LOTS more steps in ISO (200, 250, 320, 400 instead of 200 and 400) quicker access to controls, kelvin wb setting AND it feels nicer in the hand. oh god

Heh heh.. it really is quite a step up.

If you like shooting in Manual mode then having two control wheels makes the ergonomics easier - one controls aperture, the other shutter speed. Much better than messing about in menus.

yup. damn.

gf not impressed (bike obsession + existing debts = not chuffed)

tho is the d80 better in low light than d40 or comparable? thats what would really swing it for me

I've got a D80 and it's lovely....just need an SB800 for it now, a 105mm Sigma macro and one of those cheap 50mm Nikon prime lens' and I shall be sorted! Hmmmm.

The two controls wheels do make it very easy to adjust things.

tho is the d80 better in low light than d40 or comparable?

Never done a direct comparison myself, but looking at the [url= http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(appareil1)/229|0/(appareil2)/201|0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(brand2)/Nikon ]DxO Mark comparison of Nikon D40 vs D80 Signal-to-noise ratio[/url] then it looks likes the D80 is a bit ahead.

(Note: this is based on the RAW files, you may find the D40 performs more consumer-friendly aggressive image processing if you shoot JPEGs)

gf not impressed (bike obsession + existing debts = not chuffed

Simply apply woman logic: getting the D80 would mean you could get the cheaper non-AF-S 50mm lens, instead of the expensive AF-S one - so it is actually saving you money.

Oops sorry - I read that wrong - actually the D40 is ahead of the D80 on that chart - which is surprising.

yeah id heard the d40 pips the d80, i wouldnt use 2 wheels at the mo as my 50mm is a fully manual so aperture is adjusted on the lens itself

and gf isnt impressed by my spending more cash, ah well ill cut my teeth on the d40 and start saving for a d300

Ah the D40 is 6 megapixel and the D80 is 10.
So I think that means the D80 has more noise but the noise is smaller. Or something. 😕

lol! lookin at results of that test i dont feel as drawn to d80

which is a good thing...

now to take some pictures 🙂

Thanks for the DXO Mark link! I use DXO for all my pics, but I'd never come across that

yeah id heard the d40 pips the d80, i wouldnt use 2 wheels at the mo as my 50mm is a fully manual so aperture is adjusted on the lens itself

If it is the Nikkor 50mm then you should be able to set it to the aperture marked with an orange dot and lock it there with the little switch.

The camera will then control the aperture. This is a "good thing" because it means the lens is fully open until you take the picture - so you get the brightest possible viewfinder image with an exaggerated focus.

no its not the af-d either, its an old e series ie proper fully manual never an autofocus 🙂 it doesnt even have a meter reading (tho would on d300)

i love it to bits tho, metal body and best of all lent to me by a friend, the real question is whether i get an af-s or af-d f1.4 when the time comes...

Forgot about the motor in the body bit, another good reason to upgrade...

Ah fair enough.

Well the Nikkor 50mm f1.8 D AF Lens is around £89 new.
the Nikkor 50mm f1.4 D AF Lens is £209 new.

Personally I think £120 extra is a lot to pay for two-thirds of a stop.

(having said that, the f1.4 with AF-S is £259 and I would think about paying that for AF-S if I had a D40!)

The Nikon 50mm 1.8 is great. Super sharp!

I bought mike's D70 and love it. Next stop a D300 when I can afford it... I've already collected too much [url= http://andy-matthews.co.uk/blog/photography/ ]kit[/url] in 2008

As for a prime [url= http://www.dpreview.com/news/0902/09020901nikon35mm1p8.asp ]this has just been released[/url] which is the same focal length as the old 50mm on the smaller sensor on the D300 and below.

which is the [u]same focal length[/u] as the old 50mm

"same field of view"

the lens motor issue is bothering me less and less as i dont use auto on the 50 and at times frustrating its not the end of the world. plus the lenses id prob want are af-s or i wouldnt use af-s (like on a wide angle)

think 50mm 1.4 is a case of diminishing returns and also i think it may be a metal body and dif construction. id seriosuly consider one seein how much i use a 50 but ill prob get 24 maybe trade in the 17-55 and get an 18-105 vr just so have somehting bit longer and then start saving for a beastlier body

Apologies simonfbarnes. I forgot where I was for a second and was typing in a rush. pedantworld.com

Anyway, what I meant to say is nicely summed up by this chap from Nikon

The majority of lens systems have offered 50mm lenses as the most accessible way for new DSLR users to experiment with fast prime lenses (a legacy from 35mm film cameras on which they acted as 'standard' lenses). Yet Nikon has decided that its new offering should be a 50mm equivalent.

[url= http://www.dpreview.com/news/0902/09021002nikoninterview.asp ]More here[/url]

pedantworld.com

I was trying to be helpful, it seemed to me you weren't clear about the terms. A lens has a focal length which does not depend on what it's connected to - it's just a measurement of where it projects a sharp image of an object at 'infinity'. The field of view depends on the size of the sensor/film frame...

Sorry, more pedantry:

- it wasn't Nikon that said that, it was dpreview.

- sfb is quite right, the focal length is 35mm. That doesn't change.

- 50mm is usable as a portrait lens on a DX body, 35mm is a bit wide.

ok, thanks for clearing that up chaps

yeah id find 35 bit wide for portrait, ok im def going to keep a lid on my body buying-first a 24 old school manual lense then something with a bit of length maybe sell 18-55 and get 18-105 VR or ideally something fast and then look at the ever so sexy f1.4 50mm 😛

then a d300

then a wide angle lense.....

if you are properly into your old school prime lenses then the D700 would be a better option, plus you wouldn't have to argue with sfb about focal length pedantry

yeah but tbh the d300 is a pipedream, the d700, well the d700 is something to think about when i have alone time

i may steal my mates d700, totally worth it

btw mr wright im planning on selling the 18-55 and getting prob an 18-105 if youre interested

sorry, too late, shiny bike things got in the way (well a whole shiny bike actually!)

then the D700 would be a better option, plus you wouldn't have to argue with sfb

go for a plate camera and I might vanish into thin air with a pop...

Spend the money on glass unless you need something specific that the D40 cannot do. A much better investment.

i concur mr conker, now which glass.....