It is just that after some practice, magnification gave me the sharpness
exactly where I wanted it, and focus peaking didn't. It is also less
usefull on m43, and I think my e-m5 doesn't have it at all, so I kind of
standardized on magnification as my default MF workflow.
But you milage may vary of course. Good to have options.
Op ma 12 aug. 2019 om 22:54 schreef Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>:
> On 8/12/2019 1:24 PM, Jan Steinman wrote:
> >> From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> On 8/11/2019 7:13 AM, Jim Nichols wrote:
> >>> However, you cannot trust 'focus peaking', but instead you need to
> >>> the viewfinder image to get best results. It can be set to the C1
> >>> allowing for an easy workflow.
> >> I do just that for Magnify. OTOH, I've found focus peaking to work
> well, as well. Magnify, if on a tripod, peaking, if
> >> hand held, has worked for me.
> > The thing I like about focus peaking is that, given sufficient depth in
> your image, you can see where the peaking starts and ends. I find that, by
> centring the subject within the peaked area, my results are identical to
> magnifying, which takes more time and effort to do.
> Yup, rocking focus in and out gives information about there the DoF limits
> are, and allows precise placement of focal
> plane. IF - see below . . .
> > That seems to work over a wide range of apertures, and is my favourite
> technique for super-thin DoF, like the 350/2.8. But it also works with the
> OM 500/8 Reflex, given enough light.
> > Of course, if your subject doesn't have a lot of depth, this technique
> doesn't work well.
> The other problem for focus peaking is subjects with few or no hard
> contrast edges. Magnify may also not work
> particularly well with them, but often rocking in and out will allow it to
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/