From: chuq@Apple.COM (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: AF/AE vs. Manual aka All That Jazz
Keywords: opinions
Date: 21 Jul 92 06:21:30 GMT
Organization: I is a writur

rao@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Govindaraju Rao) writes:
>   Bruce Wilson writes:
> >...I just don't want to spend the money, if its not worth it...
>  
>Its not worth it.

This is a religious issue. The people who grew up without AF/AE are gonna
tell you that real photographers don't use AF/AE, and us scummy AF/AE users
are gonna tell you that those other folks are old pharts who wouldn't
understand a technical advancement if it bit them in the tushie. 

Remember, at one point, someone walked up to Gutenberg and told him that
nobody in their right mind would use a printing press when they could hire a
couple of scribes to copy manuscripts, too.

You're going to get a lot of heated opinion and very little fact. Frankly,
it's a silly discussion, because all the respondents (myself included) have
no idea what kind of photographer you are and what you'll like or dislike.

The real answer is "borrow a few cameras from friends and see what works for
you".

Now, having said that, a few words from a proponent of AF/AE to balance out
the other side that's been busily bashing us for the last few posts: I have
a Maxxum 7xi. I love it. I like auto-focus. I like auto-exposure. It helps
make shots that otherwise I'd simply miss. The point and shoot capability is
quite convenient when (1) I don't have time to do the prep work to do it the
old-fashioned way because the shot would be gone, or (2) I'm feeling lazy
and I want to let the camera do the work.

What the anti-AF/AE crowd neglects to tell you: you can (surprise!) turn it
off! Override it! Ignore it! Do it the old-fashioned way when you want to or
need to. Mix and match your modes to fit the situation. Let the AF track a
right-fielder chasing a fly ball while using a manual exposure for ambient
light, or use manual focus for fine macro work while letting the camera
figure out exposure (after you've set your depth of field and over-ridden
the exposure so the camera doesn't turn it into a medium tone).

The AF/AE stuff gives me a lot of power and flexibility, including the power
to tell the camera to shut up and do it my way. So I not only have all the
advantages of doing it the old-fashioned way like the Old Pharts think is
proper, but I've got tools and capabilities that let me get good shots when
the Old Fashioned Way simply can't cope or isn't good enough. 

Is it worth the extra bucks? I think so. You can make your own choice, but
make an informed one. 

You have to remember that most people think "the proper way" is "the way I'm
used to" so folks who grew up without the new tools will naturally feel
uncomfortable with them. I did a lot of photo work with manual cameras,
dropped out for a number of years (when I dropped out, the OM-1 was the new
toy on the block. It's been a while) and then popped back in to all this
computerized wonderment. I've been in both camps, and the AF/AE stuff has
it's place, and there are times when it is the worst thing you can do. It's
not an inherent evil like some would tell you, but a tool.

I'll bet if you check back when rolls of film were first introduced, that
stuff was evil and nasty, too. Same with the first through-the-lens
metering. Anything new is bad to some folks. 

-- 
Chuq "IMHO" Von Rospach, ESD Support & Training (DAL/AUX) =+= Member, SFWA
  chuq@apple.com | GEnie: MAC.BIGOT | ALink:CHUQ =+= Editor, OtherRealms
	A real SF writur with stories in ALTERNATE KENNEDYS and THE 
	  FURTHER ADVENTURES OF BATMAN, in better bookstores now!

          Painted emblems of a race, all accurst in days of yore,
       Each from his accustomed place steps into the world once more.