[dadipentak]

By way of adorning that shameless bump with some content, I'll add that one of the reasons for my (mistaken and temporary) aversion to MF was that my first slr was an Auto 110--a very cool little camera with a with torturously teeny viewfinder.

[Lowell Goudge]

By way of adorning that shameless bump with some content, I'll add that one of the reasons for my (mistaken and temporary) aversion to MF was that my first slr was an Auto 110--a very cool little camera with a with torturously teeny viewfinder.

That would be the equivalent of making the new Q an SLR

[sterretje]

On a curious point, and I bet there will be a split here, clearly with a K10D, K7D and K5D I am not financially restricted to purchasing 50 year old kit. Like you, my M42 lenses are a go out and have fun collection. Since photography is a hobby, why not have fun.

Careful, you might loose your bet

The only reason for my M42 collection is that the below case was given to me for my birthday in 2010. It belonged to a friend's father.


And it contained

Spotmatic with a Vivitar 55mm/2.8 macro mounted, a SMC Takumar 85mm/1.8 (at the right) and a SMC Takumar 200/4 (at the left) as well as the book "The Asahi Pentax way" by Herbert Kepler.

I've added a 55mm/1.8 SuperTakumar as well as a SMC Takumar 135/3.5 and a SuperTakumar 300/4. It's lacking a 28mm or 24mm for more or less normal FOV on the K10D.

[Lowell Goudge]

Careful, you might loose your bet

The only reason for my M42 collection is that the below case was given to me for my birthday in 2010. It belonged to a friend's father.


And it contained

Spotmatic with a Vivitar 55mm/2.8 macro mounted, a SMC Takumar 85mm/1.8 (at the right) and a SMC Takumar 200/4 (at the left) as well as the book "The Asahi Pentax way" by Herbert Kepler.

I've added a 55mm/1.8 SuperTakumar as well as a SMC Takumar 135/3.5 and a SuperTakumar 300/4. It's lacking a 28mm or 24mm for more or less normal FOV on the K10D.

really all you need then is an SMC tak 35F2 for a normal lens and to pick up a good 24mm somewhere. I use a tamron 24F2.5 with M42 adaptor

you have a nice collection there.

[sterretje]

really all you need then is an SMC tak 35F2 for a normal lens and to pick up a good 24mm somewhere. I use a tamron 24F2.5 with M42 adaptor

I was considering to just skip the 'normal' lens and use 24 or 28 as 'normal' on the K10D. That Tamron 24/2.5 sounds like a nice option for slightly wide to normal.

you have a nice collection there.

Thanks

[RioRico]

That *is* a nice set there. As for normal: I love 28mm as normal. (Depending on the exact sensor size, normal varies a little. It's 30mm for nominal APS-C, 28mm for my K20D.) But I use 35-37-40mm as longer-normal and 21-24mm as wider-normal. I find my 35/2 good for grabbing faces indoors, the 28/2 for outdoor perspectives, the 24/2 for indoors scene-grabbing. Sometimes a few mm really do make a difference.

[birdman59]

I just installed a Katz-eye focus screen in my K-x to aid me in my manual focus lens addiction.

I'm 51, btw

[Hambino]

I wish they made more MF lenses. AF guesses wrong for me sooooooo often

[derekkite]

Auto focus is nice, but so are fast cheap lenses. Right now the choice is one or the other. A friend has a Nikon d7000 with a 2.8 300 auto focus. The thing is fast, clear, very nice. But it is also very costly. For 1/6th or so I can buy an older MF 300 f2.8. I won't get the action or flying bird shots he does. But I can get more than I could with slower glass.

So I vote for MF for the simple reason that I can afford it.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

So I vote for MF for the simple reason that I can afford it.

No, you can afford them because they are old lenses and their use on modern cameras has shortcomings, not because they are MF. MF has little to do with their price. Just check the prices of modern MF lenses - they're not a whole lot cheaper than AF lenses and sometimes they're even more expensive. One example: the Zeiss Planar 85 was more expensive than the Sigma 85 or the FA 77 Limited.

[paperbag846]

I think MF is here to stay, younger people tend to be the poorest.

[Lowell Goudge]

I think MF is here to stay, younger people tend to be the poorest.

But the results don't seem to show this. There are more over 40 than under 40 respondants at this point, and when you look at the 20-30 age group, it is smaller than the 30-40 group for example.

Again, and maybe this is something that either could be a poll on it's own, or perhaps a moderator could do, is to provide the age distribution of the forum members.

Does the manual focus result match the overall distribution,

but the number below 40 is still impressive considering that the statement that prompted me to start the poll is that use will die off as the old timers stop taking photos.

[baro-nite]

Right, the poll needed to allow you to give your age group and then whether or not you use or are interested in using MF lenses. Don't know if these forum polls can be set up that way or not.

[Lowell Goudge]

Right, the poll needed to allow you to give your age group and then whether or not you use or are interested in using MF lenses. Don't know if these forum polls can be set up that way or not.

I am not so sure whether you are interested or not in using MF is relevant, only do you?

As I said, what I would be interested in, in terms of what the poll has shown, is whether the ratios as they exist are consistent with the age distribution of the forum members as a whole.

It the answer is yes, one might conclude a lot of different things like"
- what I have measured is an indication that a uniform number of people at any age group would use MF lenses, or
- that MF users of all age groups answer polls with a similar consistency,
if the distribution is different than the forum members age distribution, then perhaps as some have indicated,;
- there are only certain age groups that will respond to polls. or
- there is a stronger strong bias in some age groups to use MF than others

I will admit freely polls are flawed. If they were perfect, then the polling organizations would be able to accurately predict the outcome of an election. I see all the time, they state the poll is 95% accurate 19 times out of 20, but always find the election is in the 5% or 1 in 20 group.

[RioRico]

I will admit freely polls are flawed. If they were perfect, then the polling organizations would be able to accurately predict the outcome of an election.

That depends on whether the election results are rigged. But I digress.

I've observed young people with film SLRs, and with MF lenses on either film or digital. I have observed older people with the same, and others sticking to AF. As I said earlier, I think the dividing line has more to do with application than age. Macro shooters young and old use MF. The fresh and the moldy shooting 'scapes on 'pods use MF. Action shooters of all ages use AF.

We might get more meaningful results by asking, by age: For snapshots and casual shooting, do you mostly use MF or AF? This would eliminate the cross-application variance. Any usable poll needs the right sample selected.