I know, This subject has been beat to death here on the forums, but.........Just a reminder to all, Don
Printable View
I know, This subject has been beat to death here on the forums, but.........Just a reminder to all, Don
I have to do this too!
All of my lenses are on "0" no AFMA.
I wonder if I will get sharper shots?
I got a Lens Align Pro for X-Mas and I haven
Bob, i would say if they are that off, you should send them into Canon service. I think by their standards, the lenses are only off around the +3 -3 range. All of my lenses either are right on or 1 or 2 either way, nothing more than that. My 50mm 1.4 was off way more than that, but Canon service fixed that pretty quickly. just a suggestion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Lane
Rich if they don't go back to setting them at "0" [:P]
I second Jayson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pieter
Provided it is the lens and not the camera. With my 5D II and 1D IV my 500mm is dead on with no adjustment, with my 7D it is off and had to be adjusted.
Ah, yes, that
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayson
I agree that it should have to be that much of an adjustment. However, the amount of micro adjustment needed for a lens isn't dependent on the lens only. What if his camera is off more than the lens?
For those who might not have read this article already.
http://www.canonrumors.com/tech-articles/this-lens-is-soft-and-other-myths/
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Lane
I'd have to say definitely maybe. [:P]
If you are shooting at narrower apertures, since the deeper DoFs mask a slight misfocus, you may not see a difference. The +5 adjustment on my 85mm f/1.2<span style="color: #ff0000;"]L II makes a substantial difference. The -1 adjustment on my 35mm f/1.4<span style="color: #ff0000;"]L, given that it's a wide angle lens, probably makes very little difference.
Also, as Rick has commented, AF is not perfect. For any shot, there is an 'ideal' or 'correct' focal plane.
The first hurdle is that what you think is correct is also what the camera 'thinks' is correct - remember that the actual AF point is larger than it's little representative box in the viewfinder, so if you've got your chosen element right under the box but there's a high-contrast feature at a different distancejust outside that little box, the AF system will likely lock onto the latter.
Assuming the camera is trying to lock onto the correct feature, it's then an issue of the AF system's precision and accuracy. I posted this diagram previously:
http://www.who.int/hac/techguidance/..._precision.gif
Each little black dot would represent one autofocus attempt (i.e. one shot). Obviously, what you want is case 'A' - precise and accurate. AF microadjustment corrects the accuracy - i.e. calibrates the camera/lens combination so that the focal plane the camera is trying to hit is actually the correct one. So, with a proper calibration, you have an accurate system, meaning you get either 'A' or 'B', because the average is close to 'true'.
The other thing to remember is that not every shot will be perfect. The actual focal plane after AF will be a normal (Gaussian) distribution around where the AF system was 'aiming'. So, any single shot may be off - and whether it's off by enough of a margin to notice will depend on the subject. Precision matters here. Assuming you have a correctly calibrated (microadjusted) lens+body combination, the system should be accurate, so we can represent the diagram above a little differently:
http://msenux.redwoods.edu/math/R/graphics/normal5.gif
The center of the peaks ('0' on the x axis) is the 'true' focal plane. The lines are the distribution of actual focal planes over many, many shots. The blue line represents the results from the regular f/5.6-sensitive sensors, and the red line represents the results from the high-precision f/2.8-sensitive center point (or f/4 on a 1-series body).
John, Great explanation. I have a job opening for a prison school teacher; are you interested[:#]. Anyway, after shooting yesterday, I am not so sure it was my AF perhaps my technique is more to blame. Let me explain.
I haven't coughed up the money for a lens align system, so I was using my own homemade contraption with some info and printsI got off the internet; And even though it did show that I was back focusing, I have to admit that the entire setup was less than "scientifically accurate". Anyway, I went out and shot some little birds yesterday and what do you know, I am still less than impressed. After carefully analyzing the shots, it seemed that the sharpness is in the middle of the little bird and not so much the head and eye. So, now I am seriously questioning my technique and not so much the calibration of the equipment. Anyway,I am going to try the settings with and without adjustments, but concentrate on focusing on the eye. Also, I ran the dof calculater for a 7d and a 500 @ f4 @ 20 ft and the DOF is only .07 ft or o little over 1/2 inch---not much room for error there.
here are some examples from yesterdays shoot---tell me what you think regarding focus.
all shot with a 7D, ef500L @ f4 and the targets were between 15 and 20 feet.
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/3480.IMG_5F00_2564.jpg[/img]
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/8510.IMG_5F00_2691.jpg[/img]
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/1882.IMG_5F00_2721.jpg[/img]
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/5824.IMG_5F00_2829.jpg[/img]
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/3343.IMG_5F00_2841.jpg[/img]
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/6607.IMG_5F00_2843.jpg[/img]
Bob
I concider mine good if the fine detail around the eye is really detailed and sharp.
That said your not going to get it every time. The spot sensor covers a much bigger portion of the bird.
I see a little blur around the eyes but I am not looking on the home monitor and some detail may be lost in the posting. You probably can judge it better on your monitor.
A movement of 8 or 10 the bird should be oof.
When I first did my7d I thought it was way off, I ended up with a plus one
<span style="font-size: small;"]Thanks John and Rick,
<span style="font-size: small;"]Bob, I agree with you that their bodies do look sharper than their eyes. The eye looks prety good in the last one, nice photos by the way!
<span style="font-size: small;"]Ok.., I have 8 lenses (3 of which are zooms), 3 bodies, and 2 extenders. So.., that sounds like a lot of different combinations.
<span style="font-size: small;"]Perhaps someone will figure out how many combinations that is, and how long it's going to take me. [*-)]
<span style="font-size: small;"]Rich
Are the little boxes on the 1d series smaller than the 7d or are there just more of them to select? In other words, is the 7d spot focus similar in size to the 1d series regular focus square?
OK, After a few shots in the backyard this evening, I think my adjustments were near to close, and my technique was off on the previous shots. I started out with my previous adjustments of +6 and paid close attention to focusing on the eye---These shots were a little better than those without adjustment.
The following were with AF adjustments at +6, No post processing was done on any of these shots other than export from Lightroom to Jpeg
100% crop @ +6
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/7345.IMG_5F00_3322.jpg[/img]
Full frame @+6
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/5460.IMG_5F00_3323.jpg[/img]
100% @+6
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/6153.IMG_5F00_3339.jpg[/img]
full frame @+6
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/2475.IMG_5F00_3340.jpg[/img]
Full Frame @+6
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/6138.IMG_5F00_3375.jpg[/img]
100% Crop @+6
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/6470.IMG_5F00_3376.jpg[/img]
Full Frame No Adjustment
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/7318.IMG_5F00_3459.jpg[/img]
100% Crop No Adjustment
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/7563.IMG_5F00_3460.jpg[/img]
100% Crop No Adjustment
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/2627.IMG_5F00_3464.jpg[/img]
Full Frame No Adjustment
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/2248.IMG_5F00_3465.jpg[/img]
based on these shots and my opinion, it looks like the AF microadjustment of + 6 is pretty close. Please feel free offer your opinion
Thanks
Bob
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Lane
Better take a week off
Bob
The first 3 birds eyes look very sharp, the last 2 birds a little less sharp. However, in the last shot the birds eye is shaded, so it
Quote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
I do not know about the little square, but the sensor itself on the 1D IV covers more area than the 7D sensor (or at least it seems to). Thats why I switch the buttons on the end of the 500mm to the function that compresses the sensor size.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Williams
Bob
1st and 3rd one seem on. The 2nd and 4th not so much. The Last one is just not tight enough crop any way. All in all this seems pretty close to me.
Rick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Lane
Rich should the zooms count as 3 since you should check it wide middle and narrow?
I think the longest part for me with the lens align was the learning curve on how to read the scale quickly. At first I tried reading the exact center of focus, tried various ways to determine if it was front or back focused. I ended up with an average method that was very fast. I would take a series of 30 to 40 pictures in grey scale. Pull the card from the camera and down load to a folder that I named whatever the setting was at the time. Then I went through in adobe bridge at 100%. I found a number on top of the scale like that had just started going out of focus. Then one at the bottom that had just started. Then I would scroll through and just pick up on the numbers, if 20 was in focus on top and out on bottom of the scale it was back focus, you get the idea. I would give them like 1 star, for ff, on focus 2 star, 3 star back focus. Then once I went through them I just looked at the info on bridge and it told me how many of each I had. A typical pattern of a set might be 15 Front Focus 10 On Focus and 15 Back Focus, I would consider this lens to be calibrated.
When testing use an even consistent light. Variations in light change results.
But really do you think you have lenses that need calibration?
Rick
@all, Thanks for the look and the advice. I
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDNitehawk
Sure, the zooms should count as 3 or more, but then the 70-200mm should count as 3 or more without the extender, then 3 with the 1.4X and then 3 with the 2X, then times 3 bodies.
Yikes!
I think I 'll just start with one prime and one body until I could figure it all out.
Rich
<span style="font-size: small;"]Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Lane
<span style="font-size: small;"]I just had to give this a try:
<span style="font-size: small;"]3 zooms x 3 focal lengths is 9 x 3 bodies is 27x 2 extenders is 54
<span style="font-size: small;"]5 primes x 3 bodies is 15 x 2 extenders is 30
<span style="font-size: small;"]I think that would be 84 settings to figure out---It took me about an hour with one prime and one body, and I am still not sure if I am dead on or not. So, better take two weekends and don't plan on any sleeping, eating or bathroom breaks[:|]
<span style="font-size: small;"]Bob
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Williams
That would be an underestimate, Bob - you multiplied by 2 for the extenders, but that leaves out adjusting each lens without an extender! Fortunately, you also assumed the extenders are compatible with all the lenses and all lenses are compatible with all the bodies. Looking at Rich's profile, neither is the case. I make it out to be 63 combinations. For me, it takes about 30 minutes per lens+body to do a microadjustment.
Have fun! [:S]
Quote:
Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
Details, details[:^)], But..... looks like Rich could pull this off in one weekend (without sleep of course)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Lane
Ok I will try to figure this out to:
Provided you do three settings on each zoom
EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 X2 Bodies would be6 settings (no extender)
EF 24-70mm f/2.8LX 3 Bodies would be 9 settings (no extender)
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II X 3 BodiesX 2Extenders would be 27 settings
EF 85mm f/1.8 X 3 Bodies X 2 Extenders would be 9 settings (EDIT: Not Extender Compatable so this would be 3)
EF 85mm f/1.2L II X 3 Bodies X 2 Extenders would be 9 settings (EDIT: Not Extender Compatable so this would be 3)
EF 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro X 3 Bodies X 2 Extenders would be 9 settings (EDIT: Not Extender Compatable so this would be 3)
EF 135mm f/2.0LX 3 Bodies X 2 Extenders would be 9 settings
EF 300mm f/2.8L IS X 3 Bodies X 2 Extenders would be 9 settings
Which would come up to 87 (Edit:it would be 69 with thecorrections)if you want to go to that extreme
I would guess, maybe be wrong, that you probably treat your multiple bodies just like I do mine, just selective lenses on certain bodies. One is a back up and its only calibrated to one or so lenses. The 1D IV stays on my big teles and the 70 x 200 so I do not do the wide primes on it. My main 5D is calibrated to most of the same lenses as the 1D IV plus the wide lenses and 100mm macro. And the 7D is calibrated to the 500mm and no other, and it never gets used any more anyway. None of mine are calibrated to the 2x as the IQ isn't good enough in my opinion any way. Only the big tele's are calibrated with the 1.4x because I am not going to use it on other lenses.You get the idea, I doubt you will go to69 different settings unless your are very meticulous and then Ithink you should seek counseling about this disorder.
Your idea of tackling one of the primes first is a good idea. The wide primes are harder to do, and the zooms seem more so. Start with the 300mm with your 1D IV, it would be the easiest.
One thing I found after I got my 1D IV, is how much more accurate the 1D body is than the 7D and 5D. All the lenses I have calibrated with the 1D IV except one have been dead on. The shot patterns out of the 1D IV are tighter. The 7D and 5D both loose an occasional shot for no reason, maybe 1 in 20 it just doesn't focus. The 1D almost never misses. These are just observations off of the tripod using lens align.
Good Luck
Rick
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDNitehawk
Hey Rick, These three lenses are not compatible with Canon extenders.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
John
Thanks for correcting me. I was just getting ready to go to the Canon web site and start checking them to see.
But that gets me to 69 compared to your 63, still off somewhere.
I would have thought the 100mm would have been compatable.
Rick
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDNitehawk
Yep, I was off - 69 it is.
Wow!
Thanks for the info guys, now I could at least right this down for a plan. I knew it would be a crazy, and unfortunately Rick I am very meticulous like the rest of you guys and gals (you know who you are; insert your name here__________), when it come to things like this, so now you know why it's still sitting in the box. It's called "avoidance".
Now that my little secret is out of the bag, I guess I better get busy. I'm sure I will be searching the archives and counting on you guys for advise, when I finally get busy.
Thanks again..., now everyone get back to work! [;)]
Rich
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Lane
Rich
When I tested my 70-200mm F2.8L II I got some very strange results with the 1D IV. I ended up with some strange results. I ended up back where I started and decided that what I found is actualy how the lens is set up. It would front focus slightly at most settings and back focus slightly at 200mm.
http://community.the-digital-picture.com/photography_gear1/f/8/p/5577/49657.aspx#49657
Sounds like your going to hae a lot of fun
Rick
Just read an interesting article on AF micro adjust and tried the display pattern method----it seems to work very well for short focal length lenses in the house----could be a problem with longer lenses if you have to do it outside. anyway here is the article: thought some might find it interesting.
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/cameras/1ds3_af_micoadjustment.html
Richard,
Just to complicate matters, I have found that my wide aperture primes (f/1.4 and f/1.2) and my 180mm macro all need a slightly different setting at their closest focus distance compared to the typical testing distance of 25 times focal length.
Of course, you can only register one adjustment per lens (or lens+extender combination) on each camera (that's 13 for your 1D and 14 for each 7D, so you'll have to write down the results somewhere if you find (unusually) a large variation in adjustment at different focal lengths and/or focusing distances.
So, when I check wider aperture lenses I will be sure to test them at their minimum focusing distances, as well as the recommended 25 times FL distance.
I didn
Thanks for the Link Rick!
I'll check it out thouroughly when I get home from work!
Rich
There is a limit of 20 lenses that you can register per camera (a lens plus extender counts as a separate lens for this purpose), so you won't need to worry about that limit for a while. I was just saying that you have only 13 combinations that will work with your 1D, and 14 combinations for each 7D. You can only register one adjustment per lens, so if you test a zoom lens at three different focal lengths and find that it requires three different adjustments, you'll have to choose one adjustment that suits the way you normally use the lens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Lane
You might choose to do 21 tests with your 1D, but you'll only be able to register 13 values because you only have 13 lens and extender combinations for that camera.
Yes, Thank You Andy.
Well Undersrtood!