Robert C. Cumley |
|
manual vs auto focus
Second attempt at this...server lost me the first time.....I have been shooting with a Canon T90 for over 10 years now with good results. I have upgraded to a Canon EOS Elan 7E with Canon 28-90 and 75-300 mm lenses. I am finding that the shots from the auto focus camera seem to show more grain than shots with the manual focus equip. All lenses used have a UV filter and for most outdoor shots I use a Cokin Circular polorizer. I find the color saturation to be of higher quality also with the manual focus/circ polorizer set up than with the auto focus.Am I missing a trick or just not using the equip to it's fullest extent? Any help will be appreciated.
April 23, 2002
|
|
|
doug Nelson |
|
Polarizers behave differently with some lenses. John or Jeff has addressed this fairly recently. I don't think autofocus vs manual would, in and of itself, give grainier images. I'd look for another variable in there. Spending more money isn't necessarily an upgrade. It IS an upgrade if autofocus enhances your image quality in some way. It is true that advances in optics and zoom design will be in autofocus from the 80's on. Canon's new L primes and zooms are, of course, autofocus. In general, consumer level autofocus optics aren't as good as the prime lenses you used on the T90. But then, you might like the more sophisticated metering systems the new cameras have.
People's answers here are a matter of opinion, but, if I were you, I'd get a couple of good prime lenses for your Elan 7E, like the 50 f1.2L or a 35 f2, or 85 f1.8L, IF you're shooting for clients.
April 23, 2002
|
|
|
Jon Close |
|
I agree with Doug N. re the lenses. The 28-90 and 75-300 are not particularly sharp, especially at maximum aperture (f/4). What lenes are you using on the T90? Secondly, it's possible that the Elan 7's meter is underexposing compared to your T90. But with prints the effect of underexposure is higher grain and less color saturation.
April 26, 2002
|
|
|
Robert C. Cumley |
|
I'm using a Tamron 60-300 3.8-5.4 macro and a Vivitar Series 1 19-35 3.5 - 4.5
April 27, 2002
|
|
|
Jon Close |
|
The old manual focus Vivitar Series 1 lenses were very good lenses made by Kiron. I have no doubt that the 19-35 it is sharper and has less barrel/pincushion distortion in the 28 to 35 range than the cheapo EF 28-90. Similarly, the manual focus Tamron 60-300 is from their high performance "SP" line, is still available, and sells for more than 2x the cost of the EF 73-300 f/4-5.6 USM III.
April 29, 2002
|
|
|
Will Turner |
|
Just to correct, the Vivitar 19-35, Series one or no, was NOT one of the original Series one lenses so highly rated. I found the 19-35 lens to be worthless, extremely soft at all focal lengths to the point of unusability. You can read more complaints about this lens at photo.net and elsewhre.
July 15, 2005
|
|
|
|
Log in to respond or ask your own question.
|
