RDKirk wrote: RottenTheCat wrote:
Scrolling back thru this thread... I see the 300/4 non-IS (like the one I had) being used as an example. I can't see how any mirrorless body has any sort lens registration for it, as it was basically dumped by Canon two years after the IS version came out. I mean dumped as no longer supported, at all.
I'm wondering if we'll ever see in body corrections, like DSLRs have, in mirrorless Canon bodies. They say the lens "must" focus, due to mirrorless design. Obviously, not the case.
Disclaimer:
I've been using Canon since the mid 1970's, back in the silver ring FD lens era. Always three bodies, mostly primes (before we called 'em primes). I came >>>!<<< close to being hired as senior tech rep for CUSA (Bullington got the job, and frankly he was the better man). So there's a bit of fan boy in me. Not about to go Fake Chuck on Canon, but sometimes they do seem a bit in love with themselves, and I agree that any sort of field testing, of any lens or body, should reveal basic focus issues.
Since correct focus can be seen on the screen, we know that the camera and lens can actually achieve focus. We know it's not a hardware issue. It can only be a communication issue.
Maybe there had been a firmware revision that introduced a communication error and they didn't do a full enough regression test afterward.
This is incorrect. The front focusing can be seen on the LCD and on the EVF just as well as the resulting image file. I've had to make this point clear many times now. It's real, physical, forward biased focus that is at it's worse case at 200mm @ MFD but is my no means confined to 200mm or MFD.
Dec 16, 2019 at 07:46 PM
Previous versions of sfnorton's message #15079194 « Possible Issue With RF 70-200 »
