I recently used my 40D at a night athletics meeting and had zero problems, even though I was shooting wide open with my 70-200/2.8L IS at significant ranges.
The same old issues seem to pop up: shooting static subjects in AI Servo mode being a primary offender. I'm not saying there are no problems but my 40D performs well enough that there is no way I'm going to upgrade the firmware.
Look around in different forums - 40D and focus problems - turns up everywhere.
- but how much is due to user error, is difficult to say as I donīt own one - but I certainly am leaning more towards 1D Mark II or III N, after reading so many threads about this.
websurfer wrote:
Look around in different forums - 40D and focus problems - turns up everywhere.
- but how much is due to user error, is difficult to say as I donīt own one - but I certainly am leaning more towards 1D Mark II or III N, after reading so many threads about this.
You better read all the 1DmkII soft-image posts (now long forgotten, of course) before you make your move. As has been demonstrated numerous times, most AF issues are either user-error or, in Dave's case here, simply a calibration/adjustment issue rather than a design deficiency. If I buy a Corvette that accelerates slower than a stock Honda Civic, is it a prudent assumption for me to say that a Honda Civic has more power than a Corvette? The 40D has very sensitive and near-1D AF speed but that is moot if there is a calibration/adjustment required that was missed at final inspection prior to shipment.
Every time there is a poll here about AF on the 40D it gets very good marks. The occasional problems appear to be mostly user error, lemons, or Alan321.
python2000 wrote:
Every time there is a poll here about AF on the 40D it gets very good marks. The occasional problems appear to be mostly user error, lemons, or Alan321.
Venus wrote:
My 40D sometimes behave that way too. In fact the 20D Af although not as fast seems to be more accurate... Question is : Can this be fixed by an update download? And if so will Canon release the fix fast?
i'm gonna send mine in too.
faster than 20D, more sure, but it while it tracks stuff, in general, much better, it tends to throw the subject a lot more randomly in focus depth, lots of stuff is 6" to 2 feet out when shoot sports or wildlife, does much better with large, very close subjects. Also does much better in poor light than blaring, glaring sun believe it or not.
Hopefully it is just a little bit of backfocus, bit sometimes it feels more random.
One thing that is too bad is that if it has a choice it ALWAYS picks the object that is farther away, which usually works out badly for sports or wlidlife.
SO have to be REALLY careful with AF point. It jumps out more than a 20D for sure (although it also recovers much faster if it is does jump out).
But currently I feel 1Dmkiin places stuff really well within DOF on a quite repeatable basis even in action, 20D much less so and 40D even less so (even though the 40D tracks about getting close to, if not as, fast the 1D while the 20D doesn't).
Someone tried my 40D with his lens and was liek wow this AF not much slower at all than my 1dmkiin but then when he looked at the pics he said many were a little OOF and not well centered within the DOF.
At the same time I shot his 1dmkiin with my lens and when i looked at pics afterward was stunned to see shot after shot in 100% perfect dead-on pixel sharp focus, the likes of which not seen with either my 20D or 40D.
I'm considering purchasing a 40D as an upgrade to my 350D, though these apparent focusing problems are concerning me. Are all the refurb bodies re-calibrated by cannon? Should I attempt to go that route?(Are there even refurbs for sale at this point?)
gates_2 wrote:
I'm considering purchasing a 40D as an upgrade to my 350D, though these apparent focusing problems are concerning me. Are all the refurb bodies re-calibrated by cannon? Should I attempt to go that route?(Are there even refurbs for sale at this point?)
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/631570
As you can see out of 134 40D owners that voted 116 of them have no AF issues. Thats pretty damn good if you ask me. As far as refurb goes, they are said to be work just as good as if sold new, which would include an initial trip to Canon for calibration prior to be titled "refurbished". Check out Adorama, I know they have refurb glass, not so sure about bodies.
I'm sure user error accounts for many if not most of those who find the AF inadequate. Of course the limited amount of those who voted is not the greatest sample size, then again its good enough for many, nonetheless its a decent percentage.
Well I've checked my 40D one shot focus and it's seems spot on. I used a 135L wide open and focused at ~ 45 deg on a wide variety of printed text, wall maps, etc and it was always as it should be (at least with the centre point). I repeated using AI servo and got the same results (I released the * button when it achieved focus to simulate a subject that has stopped moving). Now just need to keep trying moving objects and off-centre points.
Another 40D is on it's way to Canon service. I was blaming my front focus issues on my 2 Sigma lenses, but tried them on a friends 5D and confirmed this camera is causing it!
Front focusing that increases at farther distances. Simple calibration I believe....
Davez0r wrote:
I can take a photo of my street sign about 20m away at 55mm F5.6 and it is in acceptable focus.
First off - I'm not having focus problems with my 40D, but I don't think the above is a valid test for focusing accuracy. Depth of field of a 55mm lens on a 1.6 crop body at 20 meters is a whopping 56.9 meters - 8.3 in front and 48.6 in back.
Just called my vendor who received my camera on Tuesday. They have tested it and agree there is front focus. They have sent it to be repaired. I believe their repairer is an Canon authorised repairer, but not Canon Australia itself. I'll let you know how it goes.
1) Several people have said they were sending their cameras in for service. Can they report results please?
2) To the stubbornly smug people who keep saying that that all 40D focus errors are user error or simple maladjustment, I would like to point out the following CONSISTENT theme in ALL of these 40D focus discussions (and there are plenty, which should alert smug people to the reality of the problem)...
The people who have no problems are always using their cameras in what I call easy situations in terms of the camera working out what to lock to. That is, photographing anything in which about a quarter of the screen around the focus point is all at more-or-less the same distance. e.g. sports as constantly mentioned here like this one posted by Bmeister http://www.bwbrock.com/gallery/2065622_Kwdo8/1/196995179_xtvdD/Large
This happens over and over again - if you check what the smugsters are photographing it is always either a) anything taken with short focal length lenses (no difficulty focusing there) or b) photographing large targets occupying roughly uniform distance. These people should go and do photography and stop wasting their time and everyone else's patience trying to convince other people who are doing completely different photography that they (the other people) can't use a camera or that their camera just needs recalibration.
There is NO systematic problem with 40D focus on large targets. The 40D is a class act for fast focus and great tracking on large targets. There may be an occasional problem with miscalibration which is easily fixed (unless you live in Australia and are not in CPS, in which case nothing is easily fixed. Canon should be ashamed of the "service" that unfortunate owners have to endure in Australia).
Any dispassionate reader who does a "literature review" of the 40D problem will quickly realise that the problem is ONLY with people who are more demanding of their camera's focus system in terms of the camera sorting out smaller targets against competing nearby unwanted objects or nearby bright areas. (Not necessarily "small' targets, but "smaller" targets).
Specifically, there are significantly greater problems with the 40D than with earlier cameras (20D and 30D) in the following situations:
- photographing subjects where there is competing distance information in the one quarter of the whole screen around the focus point. This can be a small target against a background or a broken target like some part of a tree through which is visible distant mountains. In these cases the camera takes distance info from the whole of the large area and seems to be unable to sort one focus distance from another and appears to just lock into a compromise location, neither the foreground/subject or the background/competing info. More complex but similar situations give similar results with nothing in particular being focused.
- photographing a target close to bright areas. In this case it just goes bad and can end up focusing anywhere.
- photographing a small target against a clear background, such as birds in flight, or a bird sitting on a stick against a distant and irrelevant background. It's impossible to get focus in these situations while it is easy to get perfect focus in the same situation with a 20D.
In these situations the 40D is appalling compared to the 20D, and the 30D is somewhere in between. If you doubt me, just either check what people with problems are actually saying, or try a 40D in these situations yourself. I've done both and think that people who deny the problem including Canon are being disingenuous, or are stupid, or are the victim of their own smugness blinkers. The latter are the "I take great (sports shots in low light) / (product shots) / (wedding photos) / (pictures of the cat) / (portraits) / (copy shots) ... so people with focus problems are just w_nkers and should wake up to themselves" crowd -- these smugsters really should butt out and leave this discussion to people who use their cameras differently and definitely DO have problems.
The problems are serious and Canon owners deserve to have them addressed better by Canon. And to say that you can't expect cameras to focus well on smaller targets is just silly since the 20D could do so well.
The reality seems to be that in order to get the faster AF performance in terms of aperture/light needed and in terms of response time, Canon have chosen to increase the size of the focus data collection area, and also seem to have buggered up the logic that tries to select the major portion of subject in the focus area and focus exactly on that rather than focusing on the average of whatever distances are represented in that area.
It's time we stopped comparing apples with oranges arguing about completely different circumstances, and focused (pun intended) our attention on what the problem really is. And whether Canon are doing anything to address it. My own solution was to hand the 40D back and get a 30D, but this still isn't as good as my busted 20D. We more-distant nature photographers should not be forced into such compromises, even if Canon has to bring out a version of new cameras with higher resolution focus (i.e. focus accurately on smaller objects at the expense of focus speed).
How about 'fessing up Canon? There's a LOT of wildlife photographers out there going nuts and losing significant respect for the Canon brand.
I thought that my 24-70 2.8L had gone rogue, strange because I had thought that it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. It was, on my 300D, but not on my new 40D. I checked images and I consistently got very sharp images with my 300D. Under the same circumstances I am getting OOF shot with the 40D. It focuses in front of the subject. Off to Canon it goes.
Specifically, there are significantly greater problems with the 40D than with earlier cameras (20D and 30D) in the following situations:
- photographing subjects where there is competing distance information in the one quarter of the whole screen around the focus point. This can be a small target against a background or a broken target like some part of a tree through which is visible distant mountains. In these cases the camera takes distance info from the whole of the large area and seems to be unable to sort one focus distance from another and appears to just lock into a compromise location, neither the foreground/subject or the background/competing info. More complex but similar situations give similar results with nothing in particular being focused.
In these situations the 40D is appalling compared to the 20D, and the 30D is somewhere in between.
The problems are serious and Canon owners deserve to have them addressed better by Canon. And to say that you can't expect cameras to focus well on smaller targets is just silly since the 20D could do so well. ...Show more →
Too right Mate,
One of our assistants was using one of our 20D's for about 3 months. Her Wedding images were so good we decided to buy her a 40D. First time out with it she was in tears with the results. We have all had a go on the 40D now and it is terrible. She is back on the 20D (thankfully we didn't sell it) and producing her normal high standard of images. The 40D is back to Canon on it's second visit. We've completely lost faith in it, so we are getting rid of it as soon as it's fixed (assumimg they can fix the damn thing).
