[Blue]

Is this a case where manual focus lenses on an adapter
are actually preferable to using the system's native lenses?

Yes! It is.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

This is the future. And it makes sense in an electronic era. It makes particular sense when you want to allow both AF and MF without picking one to optimize focus throw for.

I have used the Olympus kit lens and I had no issues with this mechanism. It seems sensitive to the rotation speed, so faster movements adjust focus at a faster rate, but I think right now the implementation has just two speeds - slow for precision control and faster. I can see how in the future one might be given options to customize this behavior.

And you remember how people whine about lenses focusing in one direction vs the one they are used to? With focus by wire, you can select the direction you want infinity focusing to be.

There is a bit of shock, but it will pass. If you manually focus exclusively, you may still prefer a mechanical manual focus lens - but let's face it - there are not many of them being produced these days and more often than not we have to deal with the frustration of focusing a lens with short throw that was optimized for AF.

[Anvh]

It's great for video of course

[Lowell Goudge]

I think that it may lead, in the long term to a really low cost, SDM only lens, for use on an entry level system,

Just think, it would allow MF override without risk of damage, or the necessity of clutches, and if implemented with a variable rate focusing speed as a function of how fast you move the focusing collar, then perhaps it would be acceptable, the question is, would the focusing ring even be on the lens, or would it be a toggle like many P&S cameras. that could make the lens really cheap, because the focusing collar is the last user interface on the lens presently, considering most new lenses do not have an aperture ring.

It could be done really well, but the problem is it would likely be implemented badly'

[JinDesu]

Doesn't the 18-55AL have quickshift? It's not an expensive lens, practically a kit lens (ignoring the DA-L).

[johnha]

I bought an FA 28-80 f/3.5-4.7 power zoom lens with my Z-1, it had three speed zooming (although by the time it had hit the other end of the zoom range it had only just got into 'top gear'). The problem is that very slight adjustments are very difficult to make, even at the lowest speed, by the time the lens has moved, the lag in operation means you've overshot your desired point. The solution was to click it back into manual zooming, which unfortunately wasn't as smooth as 'normal' zoom.

The 'sell' was that it allowed zooming during exposure for 'zoom burst' effects and you could pre-set a couple of focal lengths for 'instant' selection. In reality it just ate up the 2CR5 battery. As it still works on a K-5, it might have some use in video work (assuming you don't get the motor noise on the microphone). It did give us the power contacts for the SDM lenses though.

I can't see it being any better using a similar system for focusing, though it depends somewhat on the focus aids I suppose.

[lammie200]

Had a "super-zoom" camera that had that function a few years ago. Absolutely hated it. No feed back in the zoom, turn fast or slow and it still zoomed the same speed. Just really weird to work with.

+1, total crap.

[Pål Jensen]

I can't see it being any better using a similar system for focusing, though it depends somewhat on the focus aids I suppose.

It isn't any better. It is worse...

[Jodokast96]

Shouldn't "manual" mean just that?

[lytrytyr]

Shouldn't "manual" mean just that?

Merely manual control, or direct manual actuation?

[nater]

Not that it's a very good lens, but the Canon EF 50mm f/1.0 USM L, which was introduced in 1989, had an electronic "focus by wire" system. Not many people liked it. But it was probably one of the first such focus systems.

[lammie200]

Doesn't the 18-55AL have quickshift? It's not an expensive lens, practically a kit lens (ignoring the DA-L).

The cheaper plastic mount DA L's and DA's (like the 35mm f2.4 and the new 50mm f1.8) don't have quickshift. FA J's don't either, I think.

Edit: Oops, I guess you were saying that the DA L's don't. I misunderstood what you wrote.

[RioRico]

Put my checkmark in the HATE column.

[pinholecam]

Is this a case where manual focus lenses on an adapter
are actually preferable to using the system's native lenses?

For MF, yes.
I just can't get used to the mental disconnect between turning something and not having it respond accordingly/mechanically.

That said, I've largely given up using MF and non-native lenses on m4/3. The native lenses are better to me (ie. AF; fast; small; center sharp from wide open)

[Anvh]

Just think, it would allow MF override without risk of damage, or the necessity of clutches, and if implemented with a variable rate focusing speed as a function of how fast you move the focusing collar, then perhaps it would be acceptable, the question is, would the focusing ring even be on the lens, or would it be a toggle like many P&S cameras. that could make the lens really cheap, because the focusing collar is the last user interface on the lens presently, considering most new lenses do not have an aperture ring.

It could be done really well, but the problem is it would likely be implemented badly'

hadn't thought about the construction but you're right, this far simpler and with less mechanical parts and it should be able to have more precise control and have faster (auto) focusing lenses.