fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              32              34              71       72       end
  

Archive 2007 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

  
 
jmcfadden
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.33 #1 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


Jeff wrote:
Thanks, John. You wanna fly to Colorado and teach me how to focus this thing? It's probably a touch warmer here, but it's windier than all get-out!



come get me in one of them birds you fly and by the end of the flight you will be converted to the noink



Jan 26, 2008 at 11:26 AM
Jeff
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.33 #2 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


I'm nearly ready to voluntarily subject myself to that (it might be more palatable than what I'm currently going through trying to calibrate a single prime lens), if I only had the money...


Jan 26, 2008 at 12:28 PM
bcaslis
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.33 #3 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


drisley wrote:
While it looks like the Mk3 issues are mainly fixed now with the newest cameras, it looks like the Nikon D3 is showing some signs of trouble.
That's something considering that only 12 people in the world own one

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/608709


That's a pretty over the top post about one person trying to figure out a new AF system.




Jan 26, 2008 at 12:58 PM
DavidP
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.33 #4 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


Post some test pictures (identical lighting and subject, please) to demonstrate what you're talking about.


Jan 26, 2008 at 01:52 PM
Jeff
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.33 #5 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


OK, for all you 'detractors', here's a chance to prove me a complete idiot. FWIW, the only reason I commenced trying to calibrate lenses is that my initial test shots off the back deck were all over the place, focus-wise. As usual, I began to question my skills as a photographer, having used SLRs for 27+ years...

This morning, using a tripod-mounted camera and focus target, I first shot with all three of my lenses, just to see where each was at. I've spent the last 2+ hours attempting to calibrate one, single prime lens, the 50/1.4. I figured I'd start there, since it was (I thought) 'simpler' than doing a zoom (if it indeed is simpler, I'll give up before I get through the rest of lenses, but that's for me to worry about).
-----------------------------------------------
In the case of the 50/1.4, at "0" adjustment, center-point/no expansion, One-Shot:

  • Focused at 4', lens was backfocusing by a variable 6"


  • Focused at infinity (~1 mile), the focal plane of the lens was roughly 50-150 feet in front of the camera, with the 'background' (the subject) being somewhat to quite soft.


In trying to correct for the close-in focusing, about a "-3" did the trick, roughly: With the "-3", however, infinity focus was still quite far front-focused.

50/1.4, at "-3" adjustment (for close-focusing):

  • Focused at 4', lens was approximately calibrated


  • Focused at infinity (~1 mile), the focal plane of the lens was still about 50-150 feet in front of the camera, with the 'background' (the subject) being quite soft.


OK, so that won't work for me, I then proceeded to calibrate to infinity, just to see what happens.

50/1.4, at "+10" adjustment (for infinity-focusing):

  • Focused at 4', lens was backfocused only about 2 to 4" (not too bad, I might be able to live with that, or tweak further)


  • Focused at 8', lens was backfocused about 10" (not going to work)


  • Focused at 15', lens was backfocused >15" (yikes! looked awful)


  • Focused at infinity (~1 mile), the focal plane of the lens was about right, with the foreground starting to get a bit soft, as one would expect.


-----------------------------------------------

AAAARRRGH!!!!! Is there a magic setting somewhere that has eluded me? It's like the proverbial "Whack-A-Mole", and I personally can't stand that carnival game! You'll have to forgive me in advance, but I simply can't stomach providing yet another round of endless screengrabs to illustrate what I'm seeing, you'll simply have to trust me on the qualitative evaluation of the focusing accuracy. Believe me, its pretty obvious to see.

Anyway, what concerns me is that there is (perhaps) a (slight) chance that it may be 'possible' (term used rather loosely) to use an 'All lenses' setting to correct for some amount of consistent camera error (not sure about this yet), followed by then re-calibrating each lens using the 'All lenses' setting to then get a specific setting for each lens. At this rate, that would probably take 10 to 20 hours of messing with, but I honestly can't imagine that it will be successful, based upon what I've seen. And yes, for the record, my AI Servo seems to work rather well, comparatively. Go figure; from the frying pan to the fire, pick your poison.

Has anyone else experienced such results with this? Were you successful in finding the 'magic settings' that cured these One-Shot ills?

So, please feel free to make suggestions to my approach, shoot holes in it, demonstrate to me how it is me, and not the camera. Please, I'm serious, I want it to be me, really! Before you start taking shots at my 50/1.4, it has in the past performed fine on my 1Ds and 30D, though admittedly not as well as my two "L" lenses, the 24-70/2.8L and the 70-200/2.8L IS. I will tell you that even though I haven't yet rigorously tested either of those two lenses, it would appear that they may also behave somewhat randomly, but I want to make sure that my methods are relatively sound before I proceed.

Thanks for listening, and I'd appreciate any help anyone might be able to provide. Despite any potential appearances to the contrary, I want my camera(s) to work, and will do whatever it takes to ensure that happens, since I'm apparently stuck with the MkIII. The 40D, on the other hand, is still within its return period, and let's just say it remains to be seen, though I guess my next step should be to see if the 50/1.4 behaves the same on it. All my lenses have, in the past, performed adequately on both the 1Ds and 30D, so if my lenses are 'broke', it must be the MkIII that did it to them...

Sigh.

Regards,

Jeff

PS: If this 50/1.4 does need calibrating by Canon (which it may), someone please convince me how spending $150 to calibrate a $280 lens makes sense.



Jan 26, 2008 at 02:13 PM
jkurkjia
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.33 #6 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


Jeff, I'd like to comment with a personal experience I had with three 50mm f/1.4 lenses but before I do let me ask one question. How does your copy of the lens behave on your other bodies?

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian



Jan 26, 2008 at 02:38 PM
Daan B
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.33 #7 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


I was told by a Canon technician that the 50 1.4 can't be calibrated by software, only by making hardware changes to the lens itself.

My 50 1.4 was calibrated on my 5D by the technician. Only with limited success. He couldn't set it to "zero". Only close...

Edited by Daan B on Jan 26, 2008 at 07:42 PM GMT



Jan 26, 2008 at 02:40 PM
bcaslis
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.33 #8 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


Jeff, I don't have a magic solution for you but I've seen erratic results with the microadjust also. A 35L worked best for me in that I got more consistent amounts. But a 50 1.4 and the 24-70 zoom gave me results like you have. In one Canon document (still trying to find it) it referred to the microadjust as an in-field adjustment best suited for use at a particular distance and for certain lighting. I seemed to get different results with different lighting conditions.

If it makes you feel any better I think the Nikon system is similar. It really seems like neither system is a real replacement for properly adjusted lenses.




Jan 26, 2008 at 02:42 PM
Jeff
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.33 #9 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


jkurkjia wrote:
Jeff, I'd like to comment with a personal experience I had with three 50mm f/1.4 lenses but before I do let me ask one question. How does your copy of the lens behave on your other bodies?

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian


It's been 'adequate' on both the 1Ds and 30D, as I stated. I acknowledge that this is likely the worst of the 3 lenses to start with, but as I alluded to, the preliminary tests were also quite funky with both the 24-70 and 70-200. I'm not sure I can stand any more testing today...

-Jeff



Jan 26, 2008 at 02:44 PM
Daan B
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.33 #10 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


Try a 135L (if you have one). Canon Service use this lens as their default for testing AF accuracy / calibrating.


Jan 26, 2008 at 02:48 PM
Jeff
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.33 #11 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


bcaslis wrote:
Jeff, I don't have a magic solution for you but...

...If it makes you feel any better I think the Nikon system is similar. It really seems like neither system is a real replacement for properly adjusted lenses.


It doesn't, really. My lenses used to work just like lenses are supposed to: you put the little red dot on something, press the button, and it focuses. Voila! Like magic. I shouldn't have to spend $600 to calibrate my previously working lenses so that they work on the MkIII.

I feel like someone's got a little voodoo camera doll, and is sticking pins in it as I repeatedly jump through hoops like some pathetic monkey in a zoo...

I think I need to go beat myself up on the trainer...

-Jeff



Jan 26, 2008 at 02:49 PM
Curator
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.33 #12 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


bcaslis wrote:
In one Canon document (still trying to find it) it referred to the microadjust as an in-field adjustment best suited for use at a particular distance and for certain lighting.


I have looked through the Mark III manual, the white paper, and the Canon Optimizing AF Settings document, and can't find that reference.

They state in Optimizing AF Settings document that if you still can't achieve consistent sharp focus using Microadjustment, then you should contact Canon. If they state this, then it doesn't sound like it was only intended as a temporary, in-field solution.



Jan 26, 2008 at 02:54 PM
Photon
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.33 #13 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


Julius wrote:
...
One weird thing I noticed on the 40D and 1D MK III that both my 16-35L II and 17-40L lenses are very sharp at the center but soft close to the edges on both sides with these lenses wide-open. Both of these lenses are very sharp from edge to edge on my 5D even wide-open (maybe not the 17-40L but the 16-35L II definitely) so they should be better on both the 40D and the MK III due to the cropped sensor but they are not. They are sharp at the center soft at the edges until I stop down
...Show more
I think the 40D and 1DIII have higher pixel density than the 5D. Although they are not showing the extremes of off-axis resolution that the FF 5D can reveal, there could be (surely is) a gradual reduction of contrast and resolution as you move further from the lens axis of any lens, and particularly wide angle zooms. So, at the corners of the smaller sensors with high pixel density, you may notice softness compared to the center of frame with those same sensors. A FF sensor of highest density (1DsIII) ought to make this clear, by showing softening halfway or so out to the corners, and softest results in the extreme corners.

All just theorizing, but...



Jan 26, 2008 at 03:11 PM
bcaslis
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.33 #14 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


Curator wrote:
I have looked through the Mark III manual, the white paper, and the Canon Optimizing AF Settings document, and can't find that reference.

They state in Optimizing AF Settings document that if you still can't achieve consistent sharp focus using Microadjustment, then you should contact Canon. If they state this, then it doesn't sound like it was only intended as a temporary, in-field solution.


I agree, as I stated I can't find the reference. I really wish I could but I don't see it in the manual or the white paper. The bigger problem of course is zooms. On the ones I tried different adjustments were needed at different lengths.




Jan 26, 2008 at 03:32 PM
Jeff
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.33 #15 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


OK, I'm a glutton for punishment, and I went back and quickly reviewed some of the preliminary test shots I did with all lenses. The 50/1.4 was definitely not the lens to start with, and in fact its results are far more variable, and when off, are further 'off' than the other two lenses. I'm not sure how I'm going to be able to use this lens on the MkIII the way it is performing; it appears I either have to calibrate it for close or distant focusing, with no apparent middle ground to fall back on.

I suppose that I'll have to calibrate the 50/1.4 for close focusing, as there is no reason for me to use that lens (compared to my others) at longer focal distances. I was hoping that lens could live on the 40D for awhile, but clearly that cannot be.

PS: You guys are entitled to call me an idiot for starting with the 50/1.4...



Jan 26, 2008 at 03:42 PM
jkurkjia
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.33 #16 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


Jeff wrote:
It's been 'adequate' on both the 1Ds and 30D, as I stated. I acknowledge that this is likely the worst of the 3 lenses to start with, but as I alluded to, the preliminary tests were also quite funky with both the 24-70 and 70-200. I'm not sure I can stand any more testing today...

-Jeff


Okay, I just wanted to check. My take on your use of the word "adequate" is you are less than enthusiastic about the AF performance on other bodies; don't know if that's a lens issue or the fact that you are really bummed out.

The commentary below relates strictly to AF performance. Also, when I test at long object distances I test in areas are devoid of a sky background near the AF point as well as areas that include the transition to the sky within the AF point (i.e. I test for two different conditions at long distances because background color can be a problem).

Now for my experience with the 50mm f/1.4.

Back in the middle of the 10D days I was sitting pretty with three Canon lenses (17-40, 28-135, and 100-400) that worked perfectly on that body. Prior to purchase I had tested those lenses on a variety of bodies in the Phoenix area and they also worked very well on my 10D (let's say perfect). Prior to the purchase of the 10D I tested several bodies on as many lenses as possible, again at local stores in Phoenix, and it performed on average very well (let's say perfect) and I bought it. My definition of perfect is better than +/- 1/6 DOF at -1/10 magnification.

Okay, when shopping for a 50mm f/1.4 I went to my favorite local photography store (now closed) and bought one. Testing at both indoors and outdoors at -1/10 magnification revealed the AF was pretty darn good (about 1/3 DOF error). Shooting at targets that were 300 to 500 yards away revealed nothing but extreme blur in the viewfinder (a look at the focus indicator showed the lens focused WAY past infinity). I took the first lens back to the store and although at first they couldn't believe what happened, the guys at the store confirmed the problem. They had a second copy with a S/N two counts from the one I had purchased. So, before taking it home we tested the second lens on several bodies (including mine) and found exactly the same problem at infinity. They gave me a refund and I drove to another store to buy the lens.

The exact same problem at infinity occurred on the only other 50mm I could find in the Phoenix area. The third lens had a S/N that was somewhat removed from the first two copies but still focused WAY past infinity.

At that point I was stymied and decided to do nothing; well, that lasted for about five weeks, I couldn't stand it any more and I ordered one from B&H. Remarkably, the fourth 50mm was the charm, it was prefect everywhere from up close to infinity, go figure.

Incidentally, all my lenses work perfectly on all of my bodies; I just want to point out that with the exception of 50mm "my" personal experience with "my" Canon equipment right out of the box has been IMO spectacular.

So, all I can tell you is the 50mm f/1.4 "can" be problematic. Also, FWIW, based on testing two of my friend's 24-70 (I don't own one) the AF on that lens can also be problematic from the standpoint of good AF up close but focusing past infinity at long object distances.

I know you are really bummed out right now but IMO you should send the 50mm f/1.4 to Canon for a calibration. I have no earthly idea why that lens, or any lens for that matter, can focus accurately up close and perform very poorly at long object distances; regardless, I do know it can happen and also know other copies of that same lens can work perfectly. My best guess is your 50mm f/1.4 problem can be fixed by Canon.

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian







Jan 26, 2008 at 03:55 PM
SLD
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.33 #17 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


Poor Jeff.

Canon 50/1.4L supposed not to be the sharpest lens when used wide open, but i shoot my 50/1.4 @ f/1.4 all the time if needed.

Here're two shots on 1Ds Mark II ISO800 f/1.4 and 1/80sec,
xxxxxxxxx

Edited by lidesun on Jan 27, 2008 at 01:20 AM GMT



Jan 26, 2008 at 03:58 PM
jkurkjia
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.33 #18 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


Daan B wrote:
Try a 135L (if you have one). Canon Service use this lens as their default for testing AF accuracy / calibrating.


By any chance do you know how long Canon's factory repair facilities have been using the 135L?

The reason I ask is a local Canon authorized repair center (this is not a facility owned by Canon) uses a very expensive 50mm tooling lens purchased directly from Canon for evaluation of camera AF accuracy. The head repair guy showed it to me but I can't remember for sure if the 50mm tooling lens was an f/1.4 or f/1.8 (I "think" it's a 50mm f/1.8 and do remember it costs around $800).

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian



Jan 26, 2008 at 04:04 PM
Jeff
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.33 #19 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


Hey Joe, thanks for the input. I just checked, and focused about a mile out, the indicator is just hair under infinity, where I'd expect it to be.

Gee, Lide, thanks for posting those stellar 50/1.4 shots! I really appreciate that!

PS: You ready for something ugly? Here's the first image out of my new camera, 50/1.4 at f/1.4 (needless to say it scared the crap out of me):







Jan 26, 2008 at 04:07 PM
Jeff
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.33 #20 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken


Not too bad you say, for the 50/1.4? Here it is at 100%:







Jan 26, 2008 at 04:10 PM
1       2       3              32              34              71       72       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              32              34              71       72       end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account