Re: autofocus

[egoldste@xxxxxxxxxx (Eric Goldstein)]

At 6:38 PM 12/14/95,
> I would say from my experiences with point and shoots is  that autofocus
>works well MOST of the time.
(snip)

I have been toying with the idea of a twin auto P&S rig for some time, and
would appreciate the experience/advice of those on the list.

Here's my thinking thus far...

Two full size SLRs are too much camera to lug around for my style of
shooting. I don't use zoom lenses because they're inferior optically,
they're heavy, and because of the difficulty in matching focal lengths.

Twining most point and shoots will not give you increased optical quality
from the better 50's stereo cameras. Most non-zoom point and shoots (even
the ones from Olympus, Nikon, Canon, Minolta, etc.) use cheap triplets with
plastic elements, and autofocus mechanisms which are imprecise and
inconsistant. These factors are compounded when trying to match two units.
The zoom point and shoots are generally worst still, for all the obvious
reasons.

----------------------------------------------------(a quick aside)----------

LDAEnt@xxxxxxx also wrote:
>I would choose auto over fixed.

Actually, some fixed focus P&Ss at least seem to perform better than the
autos. The better ones also use plastic triplets, but because the elements
don't move they can be made to tighter tolerances. I haven't run tests, but
it does seem to me anecdotally that the three-element fixed focus
small-aperture cameras are sharper and snappier that the cheaper autofocus
models. Of course, they work at smaller apertures and need better light,
which is a consideration. They also "focus" on the same point and give
consistant exposures from camera to camera and scene to scene.
But anyway, on to more fertile ground...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, what to do to get improved optics and reliable/consistent performance
in a convenient rig?

It seems the pros all say, and most of the magazine tests seem to confirm,
that the Yashica T-4, with it's Zeiss Tessar 35mm f/3.5 "T" coated lens,
the Leica (Elmar) and the Contax (also Zeiss) P&Ss are about the only three
non-zoom cameras with glass good enough to give better optical performance
than, say, a Realist 2.8. Of the three of them, the magazines also say that
the Yashica tests as sharp/contrasty as the others (if not better!), but
only costs about $130ish from B&H, which is half or less the cost of the
other cameras.

With the Yashica, we are talking about Belplasca or better optics (with
modern manufacturing methods/tolerances/coatings/glass on the same basic
Tessar design), we are talking a 35mm focal length lens (so good DOF), and
we're of course talking a 7-8 perf format. It also seems to be a small
enough camera not be be too hyper side-by-side, and light enough to be
acceptably maneuverable. I understand the camera also has some decent
manual controls, such as an infinity focus lock, and some control over
exposure and flash operation.

I'm trying to look into this further,and am wondering if anyone has
experience with this camera, or has tried to get into it
physically/electrically. As was pointed out just today on the list, the
ideal situation might include shutter, focus, and exposure synching...

Mike Watters, you out there? Santa needs you...


Eric G.
egoldste@xxxxxx




------------------------------