Seems to work fine.

IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #122,157 by admin 10/21/03 10:35:11 AM Reply	Seems to work fine. The only place I couldn't get AF to work (other than in Super Macro mode) was in a pitch black room. I think the issue is more size of focus area when it's looking at something really close. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #122,159 by deSitter 10/21/03 10:38:30 AM Reply	Re: Seems to work fine. Just for completeness, the real issue is - in low light the lens opens, and depth of field gets shallow. My Nikon N2200 (alas, ripped off) would go "zztt zztt zztt zztt" as it bracketed the focus in low light. I'm sure they've improved these days, but it's still an issue. -drl
Post #122,165 by admin 10/21/03 11:13:02 AM Reply	Not in this case. The issue seems to be that with very close subjects, the AF field of activity is too varied to be able to peg the correct depth properly, bright light or no. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #122,183 by Arkadiy 10/21/03 1:08:39 PM Reply	In my case, I think, it's a different issue The camera is looking for the cleanest edges, while changing the focus. If there is not enough light to produce the picture w/o noise, the eges are drowned out, and the focus cannot be registered. I can actually see it happening on the built-in display -- OK, George W. is deceptive to be sure. Dissembling, too. And let's not forget deceitful. He is lacking veracity and frankness, and void of sooth, though seemingly sincere in his proclivity for pretense. But he did not lie. [link\|http://www.jointhebushwhackers.com/not_a_liar.cfm\|Brian Wimer]

Pentax Optio 550 - (admin) - (29) - Oct. 19, 2003, 06:37:44 PM EDT

Does AF work in low light? - (Arkadiy) - (4) - Oct. 21, 2003, 10:25:31 AM EDT

Seems to work fine. - (admin) - (3) - Oct. 21, 2003, 10:35:11 AM EDT

Re: Seems to work fine. - (deSitter) - (2) - Oct. 21, 2003, 10:38:30 AM EDT

Not in this case. - (admin) - Oct. 21, 2003, 11:13:02 AM EDT

In my case, I think, it's a different issue - (Arkadiy) - Oct. 21, 2003, 01:08:39 PM EDT

Bought my wife a Sony 5 Meg. - (mmoffitt) - (23) - Oct. 21, 2003, 01:07:12 PM EDT

I take much better pictures with this - (admin) - Oct. 21, 2003, 01:31:32 PM EDT

Prima donna :-P - (drewk) - (21) - Oct. 21, 2003, 04:19:00 PM EDT

Ha! - (mmoffitt) - (20) - Oct. 22, 2003, 06:28:10 PM EDT

Famous last words. - (CRConrad) - (1) - Oct. 23, 2003, 02:04:01 AM EDT

Re: never be able to fly. - (mmoffitt) - Oct. 24, 2003, 09:23:15 AM EDT

Canon AL-1 - (Ashton) - (12) - Oct. 23, 2003, 05:14:12 AM EDT

Damn straight. - (admin) - (2) - Oct. 23, 2003, 07:19:45 AM EDT

There need be no actual argument about 'better'. - (Ashton) - (1) - Oct. 25, 2003, 03:43:58 AM EDT

Wasted shots aren't all about bracketing. - (admin) - Oct. 25, 2003, 10:15:00 AM EDT

Re: Canon AL-1 - (deSitter) - (7) - Oct. 23, 2003, 08:28:33 AM EDT

Today's $10k digital rig will be $400 on eBay in 10 years - (drewk) - (5) - Oct. 23, 2003, 09:05:45 AM EDT

Right. - (admin) - Oct. 23, 2003, 09:39:25 AM EDT

Subtle, important differences.. - (Ashton) - (3) - Oct. 25, 2003, 04:10:57 AM EDT

Re: Subtle, important differences.. - (admin) - (2) - Oct. 25, 2003, 10:16:22 AM EDT

Not really - (deSitter) - (1) - Oct. 25, 2003, 03:52:41 PM EDT

Again, that's the photographer, not the tools. - (admin) - Oct. 25, 2003, 04:14:24 PM EDT

Kodak DCS Pro 14n - (static) - Oct. 23, 2003, 09:44:05 AM EDT

The world is analog. - (Arkadiy) - Oct. 23, 2003, 02:54:09 PM EDT

Just figured out what I was trying to put into words - (drewk) - (4) - Oct. 23, 2003, 10:30:14 AM EDT

But that's not what the anal-ogists here are saying. - (CRConrad) - (3) - Oct. 23, 2003, 03:14:47 PM EDT

Also, there's Kodak. - (a6l6e6x) - Oct. 23, 2003, 04:19:52 PM EDT

Re: But that's not what the anal-ogists here are saying. - (Ashton) - (1) - Oct. 25, 2003, 04:40:48 AM EDT

Vorsetzer = lit. "sEtter-in-front", actually... - (CRConrad) - Oct. 25, 2003, 05:09:05 PM EDT

Deep down facial creases!
58 ms