jotdeh Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
Thanks Mark for the Numbers, and more importantly the parts catalogues - awesome!
wolfloid wrote:
I understand the act of putting shims under the screen to compensate for front focusing, but how can you compensate for back focusing by lowering the screen? Or, to put it another way, how can you take shims out when there are none there?
I would hope that the bodies are manufactured with a target shim thickness of say 0.15mm, and then manufacturing tolerances will cause deviation to either side, i.e. requiring thicker or thinner ones than 0.15mm. So there should always be a shim,only in the rarest of cases is no shim required (or worse, even no shim is "too much shim"). This is speculation, I don't know Canon's actual target dimensions and tolerances!
Cableaddict wrote:
Mine was #4, so no calibration.
I had recently had my 5D at the NJ service center, and they shimmed the stock screen for me. (it was a hair off) I ran some tests to check it (the classic yard stick & batteries tests)
I then received / installed a Bill Maxwell brightened Ees, ran the same tests, and it was dead-on.
I was REALLY not looking forward to shimming, so whew....
Even the focussing screens will be subject to tolerances in manufacture, is how I would explain this, especially if it was only off by "a hair".
Cableaddict wrote:
There is definitely something that can cause this, as I experience it also: My screen is dead-on, of this I am sure, yet I tend to miss shots an awful lot with f/1.2 & f/1.8 lenses. Two of my photog friends have used my camera, with the same lenses, and nailed 95% of the shots.
Neither of them wear glasses, while I need +2.5 reading glasses. Maybe a diopter adjustment isn't a perfect solution? Perhaps it only brings "one plane" into focus, but messes with depth perception, or .... well, i dunno.
Wow I'm getting curious as to what the effects at play might be. In the end it might be very simple phenomenon?
|