Split screen for 5D MKII?

[jjj]

The problem with split-screen focus (that I recall from my OM-1 days) is that the split is vertical, and unless you have a sharp horizontal edge right where you want it (i.e. running right through that tiny focus area), you are forced into the focus-recompose scenario.

I have some OMs and all have diagonal split screens. You could change the screen very easily for one of the other 13/14 screens if I recall correctly! Sort of puts current cameras to shame especially as design dates from mid 70s I believe. And the viewfinder was huge compared to todays cameras as well as being a smaller camera.

[dwdallam]

I can't speak for anyone else, but how does the auto focus know where I want to focus? I have an EOS3 which had eye contol focusing and it's the only autofocus I've liked.
I use AF to get it roughly right and then fine tune. PArticularly important with wide apertures.

Because you never use multiple focus points. I always use center focus point. Then recompose for the shot. That way the AF knows what you want in focus because you aim it there. I've tested this in studio suing very close distances and i can;t focus any better than the AF does.

[jjj]

Because you never use multiple focus points. I always use center focus point. Then recompose for the shot. That way the AF knows what you want in focus because you aim it there. I've tested this in studio suing very close distances and i can;t focus any better than the AF does.

I don't like focus recompose, particularly with wide apertures  and close distances. Two reasons, it's useless unless subject and you are fairly static and also with shallow DoF, the focusing distance can change when you recompose. So I use AF to get it rough, then tweak manually, though the Canon screens are not good for MF it has to be said. Also using centre AF can tend to make one centre subject to get it sharp.
Eye control of multiple points works extremely well and really miss having it. It was the thing that finally made me think AF was worth having.

[dwdallam]

I don't like focus recompose, particularly with wide apertures  and close distances. Two reasons, it's useless unless subject and you are fairly static and also with shallow DoF, the focusing distance can change when you recompose. So I use AF to get it rough, then tweak manually, though the Canon screens are not good for MF it has to be said. Also using centre AF can tend to make one centre subject to get it sharp.
Eye control of multiple points works extremely well and really miss having it. It was the thing that finally made me think AF was worth having.

After reading your post, I admit, I have used the same technique in close up shots, especially studio commercial, product work. Like you say, the DoF is extremely short at close distances, even when using a small aperture. However when shooting portraits with my 70 200 or 24-70 at some distance, greater than 3 feet, the single focus point recompose works well with AF. One exception is if you are using an on camera flash, such as with an "off camera bracket" where the flash is connected to the camera in some way, for fill light when bouncing, you have to be sure to adjust the flash beforehand in such a way that it is pointed the direction you need AFTER you recompose.

However, what is the difference between manual focusing on a part of the face, for example, that you want the focus, and recomposing as compared to doing the same thing with manual focus? In other words, if the split is in the center, aren't you forced to center what you want to manual focus, then recompose? If you want the corner tear duct of an eye to be the focus spot, say, and the manual split screen is in the center, what's the difference--other than one is manually focused and one is auto? You still need to recompose.