Sent in my 85L MkII for due to a consistent backfocus problem. I provided a very concise narrative report on my issue. I called them to verify what was actually performed during service and they said they found the autofocus module to be malfunctioning and not focusing within specs. An "electronic" adjustment was made and the lens was "retested." With this info in mind, I was very excited to finally receive my lens and use it without the constant disappointment of severe back-focus. When I put the lens on my 5d2, it was back-focusing about the same amount, if not a bit more. What frustrates me is that I have to send this back and pay the ridiculous insured shipping for a $2K lens with the thought that it may just comeback the same way before I sent it.
Do you guys think there might be something actually wrong with the AF module within the lens. I find it hard to believe that after Canon's adjustment, a technician would actually test the lens and send it back with this much of a back-focus issue. Just FYI, the back-focus was replicated on two other bodies so I know it's not the 5D2.
What are your experiences with Canon's service. Should I call them and complain? Just not sure what to do at this point. The lens is on it's way back to Irvine by the way.
If you have to send it back again for the same problem, doesn't Canon pay the shipping both ways? Anyway...sent in a 1dMKIII & a front-focusing 50mm f/1.4 recently , and got both back with stellar results. I'd have to give Canon Irvine a big thumbs up
I would call them and send it back. Be sure to include some sample images with EFIX information. Even with adjustment getting a 1.2 lens to perfect autofocus wide open in less than perfect light is a difficult task. I used my AF to get close, but sometimes had to manually fine tune the focus.
jerrykur wrote:
I would call them and send it back. Be sure to include some sample images with EFIX information. Even with adjustment getting a 1.2 lens to perfect autofocus wide open in less than perfect light is a difficult task. I used my AF to get close, but sometimes had to manually fine tune the focus.
That would have been a great idea witht he samples. Unfotunately, I packed up that puppy this morning and sent it right back to Irvine in frustration. I've been getting consistent "in focus" results @ 1.2 with my 5D2 with a microfocus adjustment of -14. I can certainly live with that. What bothers me the most is that with my other bodies that lack microfocus adjust. I'm consistently missing focus. I'm pretty sure the issue lies with the lens.
philbinley wrote:
If you have to send it back again for the same problem, doesn't Canon pay the shipping both ways? Anyway...sent in a 1dMKIII & a front-focusing 50mm f/1.4 recently , and got both back with stellar results. I'd have to give Canon Irvine a big thumbs up
Bill
I thought about sending my body with the lens but really didn't see the point of that if other lenses are working fine with the body with no microfocus adjust. You would assume that Canon would be using much more calibrated equipment for determing focus to get the lenses performing within design specs. I could live with a +/- 2 microajust after specific calibration. But -14 is beyond reasonable, not to mention unusable on older bodies.
Jayem1 wrote:
Does it perform the same on other bodies? If so, you should have sent in the body as well.
Yes. The backfocus is pretty consistent on two other bodies I tested the lens with. from about 5-7 feet subject distance with the ceter focus point on the subject's eyes, it consistently focuses on their ears. I'm only able to consistently use this lens with the 5D2 because of microfocus adjust. Like I said before, -14 on the 5D2 and it's spot on and consistent.
Why should I have to send the body in when the lens has a consistent focus behavior. Other L lenses I have don't have this issue which bring me to the conclusion the lens is out of spec. Doesn't canon have much more specific tools to justify calibration spec than my own camera? Like I said, all bodies have querks, but that shouldn't mean such an extreme adjustment to the point to make the lens usable.
I'm starting to presume there may be an issue with the AF hardware itself. Really though, at this point, I just want it fixed right. Shipping each way is costing me $50 a pop for insured shipping.
I'd send it back too. I nearly always have good luck with Canon service but certainly not always. Yes, a phone call or two to share your thinking is also important, both for your lens and for all as that kind of thing will keep them on thier toes...hopefully. Good luck!
ezlyf wrote:
I thought about sending my body with the lens but really didn't see the point of that if other lenses are working fine with the body with no microfocus adjust. You would assume that Canon would be using much more calibrated equipment for determing focus to get the lenses performing within design specs. I could live with a +/- 2 microajust after specific calibration. But -14 is beyond reasonable, not to mention unusable on older bodies.
I'm sorry...the way I typed that makes it seem that I sent them both back together. I sent the body back first for the AF update, and the lens a week later for front focusing issues. Both came back performing excellent.
Just got off the phone with Canon @ Irvine. They just informed me that they would send out a shipping label for the return shipping. Unfortunately, I sent out my lens out of my cost not knowing this fact. The representative did reassure me that return work orders are tested more extensively. This does give me some piece of mind knowing I may get this lens back functioning properly.
I've never had problems with Canon Irvine over the last 10yrs. They have always turned my stuff around fast, they have been friendly on the phone and the repairs have been good. Maybe I'm just that lucky?
Nowhere Man wrote:
I've never had problems with Canon Irvine over the last 10yrs. They have always turned my stuff around fast, they have been friendly on the phone and the repairs have been good. Maybe I'm just that lucky?
They are pretty good in NJ, very few problems here. And not expecting perfection. Your experience is pretty common I would think. People with all great experience don't usually post about it.
Evey lens I've ever sent to Irvine has come back dead nuts on focus - 0.0 on the micro adjust. I'd keep after them until they get it right. I've got a 24-70 I need to drop off there next time I'm down in the area.
ESC in KC wrote:
Send it back with the body or they will say you should have sent in the body and it meets their specs.
I hate even thinking about the thought, but, if I get it back still misfocusing, I will send the body with it.
Really though, Canon is a world caliber optics company, and they need my little old slr body to be sure a lens is focusing correctly? My pragmatic view on this relates to the fact of future bodies I may purchase. I would rather have a lens calibrated within design specs rather than one specific body to future proof the performance of my lens. I certainly would hate to send in a lens each and everytime I purchase a new body just to make it function with in specs.
ezlyf wrote:
Yes. The backfocus is pretty consistent on two other bodies I tested the lens with. from about 5-7 feet subject distance with the ceter focus point on the subject's eyes, it consistently focuses on their ears. I'm only able to consistently use this lens with the 5D2 because of microfocus adjust. Like I said before, -14 on the 5D2 and it's spot on and consistent.
Why should I have to send the body in when the lens has a consistent focus behavior. Other L lenses I have don't have this issue which bring me to the conclusion the lens is out of spec. Doesn't canon have much more specific tools to justify calibration spec than my own camera? Like I said, all bodies have querks, but that shouldn't mean such an extreme adjustment to the point to make the lens usable.
I'm starting to presume there may be an issue with the AF hardware itself. Really though, at this point, I just want it fixed right. Shipping each way is costing me $50 a pop for insured shipping. ...Show more →
Hm, it requires a micro focus adjustment of -14 but the AF is consistent and still within the tolerance range, right? It is not a super precision device, as you know . By all means, you could send that in and you already did anyway. I hope Canon will adjust it to your satisfaction the next time around.
AGeoJO wrote:
Hm, it requires a micro focus adjustment of -14 but the AF is consistent and still within the tolerance range, right? It is not a super precision device, as you know . By all means, you could send that in and you already did anyway. I hope Canon will adjust it to your satisfaction the next time around.
Yes. At -14 on the 5D2, it's dead on. But translate that adjustment on a 5D mark I and you could be backfocusing 4-5 inches from subjects eyes from a distance of about 10 feet. Thank goodness for micro focus adust. It's allowed me to use this lens consistently with my 5D2 but I hate thinking that this is "just" a lens for the 5D2 because of focus issue. I'm not an extremely critical guy when it comes to focus. (i.e. viewing each strand of eyelash) But being completely out of focus is a total different issue.
I really do hope one day I can rave about my experiences with Canon Service, but for now, I'm just holding my breath.
ezlyf wrote:
I hate even thinking about the thought, but, if I get it back still misfocusing, I will send the body with it.
Really though, Canon is a world caliber optics company, and they need my little old slr body to be sure a lens is focusing correctly? My pragmatic view on this relates to the fact of future bodies I may purchase. I would rather have a lens calibrated within design specs rather than one specific body to future proof the performance of my lens. I certainly would hate to send in a lens each and everytime I purchase a new body just to make it function with in specs....Show more →
This has been debated ad nauseum here on this forum. Bottom line is camera bodies and lenses are not calibrated to each other, but rather to a standard. You are correct in your assumption that calibrating them to each other would destroy the concept of an interchangeable lens system. That being said, as noted above, techinally anything within +/-20 on the micro adjust is within the tolerance band. However, I've seen them get it dead on 0, so I know they can do it.
If you send it back again they may in fact ask for the camera body too. Not so they can calibrate it to the lense, but maybe to check to see if there is some peculiar issue in the way those two particular pieces interoperate.
Why did you pay for shipping? If you call canon they will send you a ups shipping label. That's what did they for me when I sent in my 7d and 70-200 each time.
. By all means, you could send that in and you already did anyway. I hope Canon will adjust it to your satisfaction the next time around.