--- Julian Loke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Gary Fisher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ...
> Interestingly though I found that the RT doesn't
> > AF while DOF preview is being used even at
> > apertures wider than f5.6.
> > ...
> > BTW Julian, what camera model did the focusing
> > screen come from that you put in your 1000FN. ...
>
> G'day Gary,
>
> Great! I'm glad I'm not just imagining things in the
> viewfinder or on film.
>
> 1) The Split-Image screen that I bought from Canon
> Australia was a spare part for the Canon EF-M
> camera.
>
> 2) On the Elan 7E, DOF preview results in AF lock
> AND AE lock. Therefore no AF, but the AE lock is a
> good backup when CF4=2
>
> 3) A good reason not to put a split image screen on
> an AF camera is that it will show the deficiencies
> of the autofocus (even on a Nikon F5 :-)
> http://home.neb.rr.com/grumpysworld/guide/review.htm
> http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/third/af.html
Hi Julian,
That's a bit of lateral thinking using and EF-M screen
- did you have any trouble fitting it? It's not like
it's going to come with a tool for removal of the old
screen or anything (or does it?).
You've saved me the trouble of checking my EOS 30 for
AF when stopped down. I'm also using CF4=2. I find
it more useful than CF4=1. I tried that for quite a
while on my previous cameras, but I could never really
get used to it. I think CF4=2 is a good compromise.
Mow if only my other camera bodies had CF4=2 I'd be
set!!
When I installed the Split screen in the RT, I did
notice some slight focusing inaccuracies (I'd
previously read Grumpy's page), however when I checked
it further it seems to me that the "inaccuracy" is to
do with focusing on 3-D objects. What I thought the
camera was focusing on was not neccessarily what the
camera thought it was. The depth of the object at it's
edge, not just the sharply delineated edge seems to
have an impact. It seems to settle on a focus point
between the front and back of the 3-D object (I'm
talking maybe 2-3 inches or about 5-8cm here).
When I tried focusing on 2-D objects it focused
perfectly (or close as). Anyway it was pretty darn
close most times even with 3-D objects. Some further
investigation seems in order (when I get time). Either
way, I think it was a worthwile change.
Regards
Gary
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
