Nikon D5000 - how to make the darn thing STAY on center focused?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Joe Mastroianni, Feb 22, 2013.

  1. I want the Nikon D5000 to STAY on spot focus center focus.
    But, every time I set it to center spot focus, it only stays that way
    until I turn the camera off.

    What am I doing wrong?
    Joe Mastroianni, Feb 22, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Joe Mastroianni

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 07:39:10 +0000 (UTC), Joe Mastroianni
    <> wrote:

    >I want the Nikon D5000 to STAY on spot focus center focus.
    >But, every time I set it to center spot focus, it only stays that way
    >until I turn the camera off.
    >
    >What am I doing wrong?


    The same thing that the rest of us are doing "wrong". It doesn't work
    the way you want. For anyone.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
    Tony Cooper, Feb 22, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Re: Nikon D5000 - how to make the darn thing STAY on centerfocused?

    On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 07:45:08 -0500, Tony Cooper wrote:

    > It doesn't work the way you want.


    Geez Louise! Are you serious? (Thanks for helping me ... I'm just
    incredulous!).

    You mean I can't set my Nikon SLR to be center focused and STAY that way?

    What's the logic in that?
    Joe Mastroianni, Feb 22, 2013
    #3
  4. Joe Mastroianni

    me Guest

    On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 09:47:45 -0800, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >Next, being able to move from focus point to focus point is a useful
    >feature, and using the "OK" button to return to the center focus point
    >is another feature. However, your major issue is, you chose to buy a
    >DSLR at a bargain price, without the feature set and capability found
    >on some of the more costly and feature rich Nikon offerings. With my
    >D300S for example all I would need to do is to select the focus point I
    >want and move the "lock" (usually found outside the multi-selector on
    >those feature rich Nikon DSLRs, not available on your D5000) and set it
    >to "Lock". The focus point will not move until I unlock it.



    But you really don't even need to use the lock. Your D300s will stay
    on whatever point you set prior to turning it off. Of course the lock
    stops you from being able to move it by (inadvertently) touching the
    selector.
    me, Feb 22, 2013
    #4
  5. Joe Mastroianni

    Don Wiss Guest

    On Fri, 22 Feb 2013, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >On 2013-02-22 09:03:04 -0800, Joe Mastroianni <> said:
    >> What's the logic in that?

    >
    >The same logic in complaining without reading your manual. Just
    >remember, there is a reason the D5000 can be had for $360. You pay for
    >features.


    It is called product differentiation, and Nikon is a pro at pulling it off.

    Take their J1 and V1 mirrorless cameras. They put a lot of thought into
    making sure that they have no appeal to the DSLR customers, and would only
    appeal to P&S upgraders. (Sensor too small, multiple colors a selling
    point, etc.)

    I'm dumping Nikon and going with a m4/3 camera. It is a standard, and you
    can mix and match lenses from different vendors. As more vendors join there
    will be more price and feature competition.

    The one I bought is the Panasonic GH3. Consumer Reports just came out with
    a camera report. And the GH3 is their top DSLR-like, and is one point
    higher than the top ranked DSLR.

    With your D5000 glass is heavy, and you don't get much in the way of
    telephoto.

    Don. www.donwiss.com (e-mail link at home page bottom).
    Don Wiss, Feb 22, 2013
    #5
  6. Joe Mastroianni

    Don Wiss Guest

    On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 17:19:11 -0500, me <> wrote:

    >But you really don't even need to use the lock. Your D300s will stay
    >on whatever point you set prior to turning it off. Of course the lock
    >stops you from being able to move it by (inadvertently) touching the
    >selector.


    If you use you left eye, you can very easily hit the selector dial with
    your nose. The lock is needed.

    Don. www.donwiss.com (e-mail link at home page bottom).
    Don Wiss, Feb 22, 2013
    #6
  7. Re: Nikon D5000 - how to make the darn thing STAY on centerfocused?

    On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 09:47:45 -0800, Savageduck wrote:

    > Next, being able to move from focus point to focus point is a useful
    > feature, and using the "OK" button to return to the center focus point
    > is another feature.


    I didn't know about this feature so it might be used as a workaround.
    Thanks.
    Joe Mastroianni, Feb 22, 2013
    #7
  8. Re: Nikon D5000 - how to make the darn thing STAY on centerfocused?

    On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 15:31:16 -0800, Savageduck wrote:

    > If he wants to stick with his D5000 and not bother with re-centering
    > with the "OK" button, all he needs to do is just get rid of the focus
    > points altogether and select the "Auto-area" AF-area mode.


    I've found all the focus methods lacking other than plain and
    simple center focus.

    My 1:2:3 methodology is simple (KISS):
    0. I let the camera do the exposure metering
    1. I focus on the subject (half press)
    2. I compose the picture (pressing to keep the subject in focus)
    3. I count (if human) to give them time to smile

    A good percentage of the time, the auto-focus picks the wrong
    subject to focus on, especially for mechanical objects.
    Joe Mastroianni, Feb 22, 2013
    #8
  9. Re: Nikon D5000 - how to make the darn thing STAY on centerfocused?

    On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 16:50:42 -0800, Savageduck wrote:

    > Rather than the old trick of pre-focusing, AF lock ,
    > and reframe. Just move the focus point to cover your subject wherever
    > you want it in the frame and shoot. Then push that "OK" button to
    > recenter.


    I'll try that new technique.

    Although, it certainly is more comfortable to just focus,
    then compose ... rather than compose and then focus.
    Joe Mastroianni, Feb 23, 2013
    #9
  10. Joe Mastroianni

    David Taylor Guest

    On 22/02/2013 23:27, Don Wiss wrote:
    []
    > I'm dumping Nikon and going with a m4/3 camera. It is a standard, and you
    > can mix and match lenses from different vendors. As more vendors join there
    > will be more price and feature competition.
    >
    > The one I bought is the Panasonic GH3. Consumer Reports just came out with
    > a camera report. And the GH3 is their top DSLR-like, and is one point
    > higher than the top ranked DSLR.
    >
    > With your D5000 glass is heavy, and you don't get much in the way of
    > telephoto.
    >
    > Don. www.donwiss.com (e-mail link at home page bottom).


    I found that 4/3 was not /than/ much smaller and lighter than my D5000,
    and it was more expensive than I wanted to pay, so I got a "bridge"
    camera to complement my D5000. I went for the Sony HX200V, which has a
    zoom range of 27 - 810 mm (equivalent).

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cyber-shot-dsc-hx200v/

    Been quite pleased with it so far, and I've kept the DSLR for when it's
    really needed (not very often so far!).
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, Feb 23, 2013
    #10
  11. Joe Mastroianni

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 04:57:59 +0000 (UTC), Joe Mastroianni <>
    wrote:
    : On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 16:50:42 -0800, Savageduck wrote:
    :
    : > Rather than the old trick of pre-focusing, AF lock ,
    : > and reframe. Just move the focus point to cover your subject wherever
    : > you want it in the frame and shoot. Then push that "OK" button to
    : > recenter.
    :
    : I'll try that new technique.
    :
    : Although, it certainly is more comfortable to just focus,
    : then compose ... rather than compose and then focus.

    But the latter is more accurate, on average, especially at wide apertures or
    when the subject isn't very far away. Whenever you move the camera, you're
    bound to introduce a bit of fore-and-aft motion, and you're relying on the
    depth of field to bail you out.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Feb 23, 2013
    #11
  12. Joe Mastroianni

    Don Wiss Guest

    On 23 Feb 2013, David Taylor <> wrote:

    >On 22/02/2013 23:27, Don Wiss wrote:
    >> With your D5000 glass is heavy, and you don't get much in the way of
    >> telephoto.


    >I found that 4/3 was not /than/ much smaller and lighter than my D5000,
    >and it was more expensive than I wanted to pay,


    The m4/3 bodies vary in size. Size was not my issue, but weight was. My
    Nikon is still a D300, which is heavier than the plastic ones that lack a
    focus motor in the body. I do plan to sell off my Nikon stuff, except for
    my Nikon 950. For macros its small sensor makes it easier to get the object
    all in focus.

    > so I got a "bridge"
    >camera to complement my D5000. I went for the Sony HX200V, which has a
    >zoom range of 27 - 810 mm (equivalent).
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cyber-shot-dsc-hx200v/
    >
    >Been quite pleased with it so far, and I've kept the DSLR for when it's
    >really needed (not very often so far!).


    One option for you would be to get one of the smaller m4/3 bodies and the
    Panasonic 7-14 lens. That gives you 14-28 equivalent, which would nicely
    fill in under the Sony.

    Not that I'm taking many storefront pictures these days, but if there is a
    large vehicle parked in front it can be hard to get a picture. Wider makes
    it easier.

    Don. www.donwiss.com/pictures/ (e-mail link at page bottoms).
    Don Wiss, Feb 23, 2013
    #12
  13. Joe Mastroianni

    David Taylor Guest

    On 23/02/2013 20:27, Don Wiss wrote:
    []
    > The m4/3 bodies vary in size. Size was not my issue, but weight was. My
    > Nikon is still a D300, which is heavier than the plastic ones that lack a
    > focus motor in the body. I do plan to sell off my Nikon stuff, except for
    > my Nikon 950. For macros its small sensor makes it easier to get the object
    > all in focus.

    []
    > One option for you would be to get one of the smaller m4/3 bodies and the
    > Panasonic 7-14 lens. That gives you 14-28 equivalent, which would nicely
    > fill in under the Sony.
    >
    > Not that I'm taking many storefront pictures these days, but if there is a
    > large vehicle parked in front it can be hard to get a picture. Wider makes
    > it easier.
    >
    > Don. www.donwiss.com/pictures/ (e-mail link at page bottoms).


    I still have my Nikon Coolpix 990 (and the original Nikon Coolpix 900)
    and you are right that they make excellent macro cameras. They also
    have an entrance pupil similar to that of the eye, so you can press them
    up against telescopes etc. and take the view through the instrument with
    little loss. I still have my D60 DSLR in case the D5000 fails.

    Good point about the wide-angle. One of my favourite lenses for the
    D5000 has been my Tamron 10-24 mm, so about 15-36 mm equivalent on the
    D5000. I could certainly live with 14-28 mm for wide angle,
    complementing the Sony's 27 - 810 mm nicely. Thanks for the suggestion!
    I've yet to be on a trip where I have both the DSLR and the bridge
    cameras, but I did try taking /only/ the bridge camera on a recent trip
    to the Netherlands:

    http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2012/09-The-Netherlands/index.html
    http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2012/09-The-Netherlands/album/index.html

    When I'm in town or just want a quick "snap" the iPad 3 camera or even
    the Huawei Ascend G300 phone (both 5 MP) suffice.

    https://twitter.com/gm8arv/status/304294678151450625/photo/1
    https://twitter.com/gm8arv/status/303545017543311360/photo/1
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, Feb 24, 2013
    #13
  14. Joe Mastroianni

    John Turco Guest

    On 2/24/2013 2:48 AM, David Taylor wrote:
    > On 23/02/2013 20:27, Don Wiss wrote:
    > []
    >> The m4/3 bodies vary in size. Size was not my issue, but weight was. My
    >> Nikon is still a D300, which is heavier than the plastic ones that lack a
    >> focus motor in the body. I do plan to sell off my Nikon stuff, except for
    >> my Nikon 950. For macros its small sensor makes it easier to get the
    >> object all in focus.

    > []
    >> One option for you would be to get one of the smaller m4/3 bodies and the
    >> Panasonic 7-14 lens. That gives you 14-28 equivalent, which would nicely
    >> fill in under the Sony.
    >>
    >> Not that I'm taking many storefront pictures these days, but if there
    >> is a large vehicle parked in front it can be hard to get a picture. Wider
    >> makes it easier.
    >>
    >> Don. www.donwiss.com/pictures/ (e-mail link at page bottoms).

    >
    > I still have my Nikon Coolpix 990 (and the original Nikon Coolpix 900)
    > and you are right that they make excellent macro cameras. They also
    > have an entrance pupil similar to that of the eye, so you can press them
    > up against telescopes etc. and take the view through the instrument with
    > little loss. I still have my D60 DSLR in case the D5000 fails.
    >
    > Good point about the wide-angle. One of my favourite lenses for the
    > D5000 has been my Tamron 10-24 mm, so about 15-36 mm equivalent on the
    > D5000. I could certainly live with 14-28 mm for wide angle,
    > complementing the Sony's 27 - 810 mm nicely. Thanks for the suggestion!
    > I've yet to be on a trip where I have both the DSLR and the bridge
    > cameras, but I did try taking /only/ the bridge camera on a recent trip
    > to the Netherlands:
    >
    > http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2012/09-The-Netherlands/index.html
    > http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2012/09-The-Netherlands/album/index.html
    >
    > When I'm in town or just want a quick "snap" the iPad 3 camera or even
    > the Huawei Ascend G300 phone (both 5 MP) suffice.
    >
    > https://twitter.com/gm8arv/status/304294678151450625/photo/1
    > https://twitter.com/gm8arv/status/303545017543311360/photo/1



    Well, "suffice" is the optimal word! Those "bridge cameras" snap much
    better shots, as your Netherlands photos clearly attest.

    John
    John Turco, Feb 25, 2013
    #14
  15. Joe Mastroianni

    David Taylor Guest

    On 25/02/2013 03:09, John Turco wrote:
    []
    > Well, "suffice" is the optimal word! Those "bridge cameras" snap much
    > better shots, as your Netherlands photos clearly attest.
    >
    > John


    Yes, John, and the DSLR would be better again. I suppose I'm using the
    word "suffice" in an engineering context - if the picture is for Twitter
    then there's little point in having it greater than, say, 1024 x 768 or
    the 16:9 equivalent as the great majority of viewers will be using no
    more than that display resolution, and the great majority won't mind the
    greater noise in the lower light images. Most will be looking at what
    the images show (e.g, that's a great-looking place!) rather than their
    technical merit.

    Were I asked to do anything serious, it would likely be the DSLR I would
    take, but for carrying round on a day's walking it would be the bridge
    camera, and for those occasions when I don't have "a camera" with me,
    the 'phone and iPad mean that I now have pictures where I would
    otherwise not. Oh, and DSLR cameras might not have been welcome at a
    recent event where the star of the TV series "Borgen" was in Edinburgh
    answering questions:

    https://twitter.com/gm8arv/status/298064703312261121/photo/1

    Mind you, you do feel a little self-concious holding up an iPad to take
    photos!

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b019ch5q
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21322318

    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, Feb 25, 2013
    #15
  16. Joe Mastroianni

    John Turco Guest

    On 2/25/2013 3:17 AM, David Taylor wrote:
    > On 25/02/2013 03:09, John Turco wrote:
    > []
    >> Well, "suffice" is the optimal word! Those "bridge cameras" snap much
    >> better shots, as your Netherlands photos clearly attest.
    >>
    >> John

    >
    > Yes, John, and the DSLR would be better again. I suppose I'm using the
    > word "suffice" in an engineering context - if the picture is for Twitter
    > then there's little point in having it greater than, say, 1024 x 768 or
    > the 16:9 equivalent as the great majority of viewers will be using no
    > more than that display resolution, and the great majority won't mind the
    > greater noise in the lower light images. Most will be looking at what
    > the images show (e.g, that's a great-looking place!) rather than their
    > technical merit.


    Personally, I love "super zoom" models. My top one is a Nikon "P500"
    (36x optical, 12 megapixels). It was purchased last May (refurbished,
    in like-new condition), but, never used.

    A Kodak "P850" is my photographic workhorse, although it was introduced
    'way back in 2005; it's 12x and 5 MP, and has around 22,000 images to
    its credit.

    > Were I asked to do anything serious, it would likely be the DSLR I would
    > take, but for carrying round on a day's walking it would be the bridge
    > camera, and for those occasions when I don't have "a camera" with me,
    > the 'phone and iPad mean that I now have pictures where I would
    > otherwise not. Oh, and DSLR cameras might not have been welcome at a
    > recent event where the star of the TV series "Borgen" was in Edinburgh
    > answering questions:
    >
    > https://twitter.com/gm8arv/status/298064703312261121/photo/1


    In that thumbnail portrait, you bear a striking resemblance to Santa Claus.

    > Mind you, you do feel a little self-concious holding up an iPad to take
    > photos!
    >
    > http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b019ch5q
    > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21322318


    I haven't watched television at all, in years.

    John
    John Turco, Feb 25, 2013
    #16
  17. Joe Mastroianni <> wrote:
    > On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 15:31:16 -0800, Savageduck wrote:


    > My 1:2:3 methodology is simple (KISS):
    > 0. I let the camera do the exposure metering
    > 1. I focus on the subject (half press)
    > 2. I compose the picture (pressing to keep the subject in focus)
    > 3. I count (if human) to give them time to smile


    > A good percentage of the time, the auto-focus picks the wrong
    > subject to focus on, especially for mechanical objects.


    Using 2. you make *sure* that the focus is behind the object
    you focussed on in 1. The more 2., the more behind. (If that
    matters depends on the DOF.)

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Feb 25, 2013
    #17
  18. Joe Mastroianni

    David Taylor Guest

    On 25/02/2013 21:17, John Turco wrote:
    > On 2/25/2013 3:17 AM, David Taylor wrote:

    []
    >> https://twitter.com/gm8arv/status/298064703312261121/photo/1

    >
    > In that thumbnail portrait, you bear a striking resemblance to Santa Claus.

    []
    > John


    Depending on the time of year, my street response (when appropriate) may
    be "God bless you, my son!", or "Ho, ho ho!". A round Christmas-time,
    children on the 'bus are often slightly concerned to see me, and do
    wonder about Father Christmas!
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, Feb 26, 2013
    #18
  19. Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    > In article <2013022209474525485-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck


    >> The same logic in complaining without reading your manual. Just
    >> remember, there is a reason the D5000 can be had for $360. You pay for
    >> features.


    > On the other hand this seems to be a pretty basic feature which one
    > would expect even in an entry level camera. Like selling a car without
    > the handbrake.


    Rather a bargain bottom price car without climate control.

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Feb 26, 2013
    #19
  20. George Kerby <> wrote:
    > "Wolfgang Weisselberg" <> wrote:

    [...]

    > WHY do your posts, and ONLY your posts come in here dated "Monday" and it's
    > Wednesday evening Zulu Time?!?


    Because the posts were indeed written on the date they carry,
    but didn't reach you before Wednesday evening Zulu Time.

    Oh. You don't get it yet. Usenet, like email, is NOT a phone
    conversation. It's a store and forward medium. Immediate
    delivery is not guaranteed, heck, delivery isn't guaranteed.
    In case of email, it's "best effort", in case of Usenet, "flood
    fill". It's an offline medium. It's not real time at all.

    Still no enlightenment? OK. Let's just say that some
    component --- in this case on my side --- doesn't (and often
    cannot) pull and push usenet postings in near real time, due
    to the fact that it doesn't have a connection round the clock.
    Syncing is performed when it's opportune.

    Any more questions? Ah, yes. No, I don't think a backup
    satellite internet connection is worth it just so you get my
    postings earlier. After all, you don't read 24/7 either.

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Mar 1, 2013
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Get lost

    Re: New: Nikon D5000

    Get lost, Apr 14, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    612
    Dyna Soar
    Apr 16, 2009
  2. PDM

    Re: Nikon D5000

    PDM, Apr 15, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    275
    measekite
    Apr 15, 2009
  3. robert w fischer

    Nikon D5000

    robert w fischer, May 4, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    389
  4. SPAM.WATCH

    Re: Nikon D5000 Recalled

    SPAM.WATCH, Aug 13, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    467
    Frédérique & Hervé Sainct
    Aug 15, 2009
  5. U vigilance
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    455
    tony cooper
    Oct 12, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page