p.34 #1 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
jkurkjia wrote:
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
I had all my stuff calibrated two/three months ago. It was then the technician told me they used the 135L as a reference lens for calibration. It was also then the tech told me the 50 1.4 can only be calibrated by making actual changes to the hardware of the lens (instead of using software). Therefore, calibration can only be succesfull to a certain degree. He couldn't set mine to "zero", but came very close. It seems like a very tricky do-it-yourself-calibration lens...
p.34 #3 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Daan B wrote:
It was also then the tech told me the 50 1.4 can only be calibrated by making actual changes to the hardware of the lens (instead of using software).
Yup, regarding the 50 f/1.4 calibration comment, it doesn't surprise me one bit.
Also, thanks for your reply regarding my 135 question.
p.34 #5 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
I agree with the frontfocusing, I routinely have to dial in +7 to +10 on my 50mm 1.2. I know, its supposed to backfocus and it doesnt make any sense. Anyways heres one I took this afternoon at 1.6 with +7 dialed in. I focused on her left brow because she wears glasses. She wasn't too happy because she has chapped lips, you can view the origionals here also
p.34 #6 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Jeff wrote:
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.
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):
My experience with the three 50mm f/1.4 lenses was pretty extreme; i.e. the focus indicator showed the lens was nearly pegged at the "beyond infinity" point.
Just to remind you of one thing that I know you are aware of. The focus setting optically and the associated indicator is very dependent on temperature. I shoot anywhere from the low twenties to a max of 115°F. When shooting at infinity and although the lens mechanism converges to perfect focus, the indicator "very noticeably" moves around the infinity point.
AFAIC "being in focus" is a lot like pregnancy, you either are or are not and an indicator isn't always a good indicator of either condition. :-)
BTW, if I was in your shoes I'd be scared after seeing the first shot. :-(
p.34 #7 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
bcaslis wrote:
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.
Sorry guys don't have time to read the whole thread and I don't own a MkIII so apologies if it has been mentioned already.
I do know that focus varies depending on the light source with the 20D. I went through quite bit of this when finding focus variability on a 20D. It turned out that natural and man made lighting caused the AF to front or back focus differently and consistently with the different light sources. This was also confirmed by others.
Here also is a link on the technical workings of Canon's AF system.
p.34 #8 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
jkurkjia wrote:
BTW, if I was in your shoes I'd be scared after seeing the first shot. :-(
Luckily it's only the 50/1.4 that does that extreme variance between mid-close and far. Close-up (1-2') it's about perfect as is. It's just mind-numbing, and I guess I'm just going to have to set it for close-up work and leave it at that. I've gotten some fine images with the lens (on the 1Ds), I guess it's just going to have to be limited to a very small percentage of my work...
p.34 #14 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
drisley wrote:
Big nikon troll, we enjoy your posts too. I'm glad you have time to keep track (incorrectly) what people may or may not want. Keep the posts coming, very hillarious! nikon has done everybody a favour by keeping D3 access to a few people, now that problems are showing up with the few people in the world that own one.
Enjoy your broken D3's
Are you serious? The only one saying the D3 is broken is you. You know, the person who doesn't have one. It's one thing for an owner to talk about problems with a camera, you are just spreading FUD like some adolescent. How about contributing something useful instead of this nonsense.
