My 50D needs big micro AF adjustments

[matthijs]

<p>Today I tried to calibrate some of my lenses because I was pretty sure that the AF of my new 50D in combination with these lenses was a little off. I didn't use a very scientific method but I'm sure that my adjustments aren't too far of the mark. (I shot a very detailed small object at ranges close to the minimum focus distance at wide open aperture and stopped down one stop.)</p>

<p>I adjusted a 70-200/F4 L IS and a 50/F1.8 lens. The 70-200 ended at -15 and the 50 ended at +14. These values lie pretty far apart in my (absolutely uninformed) opinion.</p>

<p>Is this acceptable behaviour or should I be worried that my brand new 50D has an AF problem?</p>

[scottg]

<p>You might be right to worried about the focus on the 50D. To begin with, in 2005 I purchased a 20D with a 70-200mm f2.8 (non-IS) in 2005 and got amazing results for about a year and then I began to notice the photos were a little out of focus. To make a vary long story short, I have sent that 20D (with the lens) back to factory 3 times since then. While the 20D was in the shop last January, I purchased a 50D and have never really been happy with the results. Today, I took both cameras out with a 100mm macro and the 70-200 f2.8 for a test shooting with mixed results. I take a lot of photos of horses so I know my subjects well and when I get a good shot I can count the hairs on their eyelashes. The photo attched was taken in 2005 with the 20D and the 70-200 f2.8 from about 150' with the horse running tword me - I have not been able to get sinmilar results with the 50D. If anyone out there has issue with focus on the 50D I would like to hear but I will most likely send it back for repair.</p>

[scottg]

<p>You might be right to worried about the focus on the 50D. To begin with, in 2005 I purchased a 20D with a 70-200mm f2.8 (non-IS) in 2005 and got amazing results for about a year and then I began to notice the photos were a little out of focus. To make a vary long story short, I have sent that 20D (with the lens) back to factory 3 times since then. While the 20D was in the shop last January, I purchased a 50D and have never really been happy with the results. Today, I took both cameras out with a 100mm macro and the 70-200 f2.8 for a test shooting with mixed results. I take a lot of photos of horses so I know my subjects well and when I get a good shot I can count the hairs on their eyelashes. The photo attched was taken in 2005 with the 20D and the 70-200 f2.8 from about 150' with the horse running tword me - I have not been able to get sinmilar results with the 50D. If anyone out there has issue with focus on the 50D I would like to hear but I will most likely send it back for repair.</p><div></div>

[matthijs]

<p>Well.. I read some more and I tested some more. The further tests were at slightly longer distances, up to 5 meter. Still not the advised 50x focal length for the longer lens but It was what I could do at the moment.</p>

<p>Tomorrow I'll probably try again because then I'll have better light.</p>

<p>Anyway, the 50/1.8 still has an adjustment (+10) but the 70-200 I'm not that sure of. It might be best at 0 adjustment.</p>

<p>Friendly advise on this subject is welcome.</p>

<p>Kind regards, Matthijs.</p>

[alec_myers]

<p>It's not just one model of camera. I've sent my 1DMkIII and 70-200 back three times, and only now am I happy with the focus calibration.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>I've not had any AF problems with my 50D, and I was hoping to use the micro AF adjustments but, alas, it was not meant to be. However, if a camera is in need of micro AF adjustments, it normally is off in one direct, e.g., only back-focuses or front-focuses, but not both. What the OP may be experiencing may be diverse focus shift linked to individual lenses. In such cases you need to have the lens calibrated. I had a 70-200 4L that back focused only on the left side. No about of monkeying with camera calibration can fix that. However Canon calibrated the lens and now it works great with all my bodies.</p>

[matthijs]

<p>I'm leaning toward user error on the 70-200 but in between "serious" photography I'll be playing around with AF tests in the coming weeks.</p>

<p>Once a few years ago a saw some shots posted of a Canon lens calibration range. I tried to find them again but couldn't. If someone knows where to find such shots I'd be moderately interested.</p>

[david_amberson1]

<p>Sounds like testing error. First off, dont test with the lens stopped down. Always wide open. I dont use the 50x distance. For a 300mm lens, you'd need to remodel. I go to minimum focus distance an back up 6-8" from there so its not maxed out. The DOF is the shallowest there and more easier to descern errors in focus. Even Canon tech support says camera should be accurate from Min to Infinity focus distance.</p>

<p>Its not only your body, I have a 1DIII and have sent it in and now the 2 L's and body are spot on. My 50 1.8 however needs a +5 shift and its retty good now. Not real consistent though as to be expected with non USM lenses.</p>

<p>I would also look into the <a href="http://www.rawworkflow.com/lensalign">Lens Align</a> product. Bought one Friday and its real nice and very accurate and repeatable for testing this. Michael is very good to do business with. Bought Friday at 5pm here in Alabama, he shipped it from Orlando and I got it the next day before noon.</p>

<p>The target is parallell with the sensor so no focus errors on the focus sensor picking up something unintended.</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

<p>No offence, but I sometimes wonder what all you people did before cameras had micro focus adjustment. I've never had a problem with any camera or lens regarding focus accuracy. Unless you're shooting wide open all the time the aperture takes care of any minor focus shifts with the added DoF.</p>

[matthijs]

<p>All you people...</p>

<p>I'll try not to be offended.</p>

<p>Anyway, a lot of my 50D shots were not as I expected and that's reason enough to start testing my gear.</p>

<p>I always start with assuming my gear is o.k. and only when I'm disappointed I start testing.</p>

<p>Now I'm getting to know my 50D the results are improving. So as I said before: maybe it's just user error.</p>

[david_amberson1]

<p>All you people. Let me tell you something Jamie. I purchased a $4700 and a $2000 lens. And at $6700, I expect my subjects to be tack sharp where I focused. Thats not unreasonable. If I focus on the lead eye, and the rear eye is in focus, it pisses me off. Especially at weddings. You dont get a second chance. I've had these issues beofre even looking at the LCD, you couldnt see it, but on the monitor, you could. It drives me nuts when people act like a photographer is being unreasonable for wanting his equipment calibrated better to give the results it should give. Some of us like to shoot wide open, some absolutely must shoot wide open. And when we do, it should deliver a high percentage of focused shots.</p>

<p>I like the OP happen to feel that Canon is slipping on the quality control somewhat. Many users of new equipment are having issues where focus is NOT achieved at the point of focus selected. And almost always due to poor lens calibration or camera calibration. As he said, the 20D never did it. And the 50D gives him crap. Period.Why is it such a hot topic when someone has a problem. All the fan boys gotta come out like we are bashing the product.<br>

The 1DIII was supposed to have this new, all improved, better than anything AF system. It has just now as of March 2009 starting getting a comparable number of keepers compared to the older version. This after the latest fix for the AF system.</p>

<p> It happens. Remember, most dont come on here when there stuff works perfect. They just use it and are happy. They come on here when they arent sure, cause they arent happy. The bought an upgrade and dont feel its an upgrade.</p>

<p>Your question about "What did yall do before all the AF Micro adjustments etc" Well, in the film days, you didnt know until the film was developed and then the customer just got whatever crap came out from film. Nothing you could do about it. Wasnt very often, cause things seem to be more reliable back then.<br>

Same thing with digital before AF micro. Except at least then, you knew the exposure was good. But people have always sent stuff back in to Canon. Now, most of this can be fixed here at home so you can get what you paid for. Also, I've seen where some didnt even know they had a problem. They thought it was as good as it gets. And always wondered why my stuff always had a pop theres didnt. They always thought it was because mine was more expensive.<br>

Once they got calibrated, they couldnt believe the difference. So some have issues, but arent experienced enough to know it.</p>

<p>Jamie, if you have never had an isssue. Congratulations, you won the lottery. I'm happy for you. But you arent the only one that uses Canon gear. Its geting annoying that everytime someone posts a question on here, they get bashed. I get tons of emails from OP's that give up on the threads and just email me personally cause they dont want to get flammed. I dont think thats what the owner of this site intended. Its supposed to get help to photographers from the years of experienced photogs on here. By that, the advertisers are seen and it generates revenue. The fan boys on here are running everyone off. I've been told several times in these emails that this was the last time they'd use Photo.net and would use FM or POTN or DPReview etc. And I always defend the net and say there are a lot of very experienced users here and always want to help.</p>

 

<p >Example: William W. Very helpful. Always willing. Has helped thru private emails a couple of times.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Nadine Ohara. Same thing. Always nice. Always willing to offer advice based on experience.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Elliot Bernsteine. Same thing.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >And the list could go on. But as usual, the bad ones always out shine the good. And this runs off users. I personally like this forum, cause its clutter free and pretty easy to use.</p>

<p >But if it depletes down, we’ll have to find another eventually.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >If you have nothing to offer the OP other than, "I dont know what your problem is, I've never had a problem", then dont post at all. Go fly a kite or something. That helps no one. The OP didnt ask if you were happy with all of your equipment. The OP asked if their findings were abnormal. Wasnt sure. </p>

 

[jamie_robertson2]

<p>David,</p>

<p>Hell, man... ease off dude. Firstly, I'm from the UK and have no idea what "fan boy" means. I've got £5000 ($8000) worth of gear too and I would also hate it if something wasn't quite right. All I am saying is that I have yet to own a lens/camera that doesn't focus as it was designed.</p>

<p>Maybe you're right... maybe I have just been lucky. But I can't help thinking back beyond the past two years or so before cameras had micro adjustment. I can't recall that many people complaining about back focusing, front focusing or whatever. Now the internet forums are full of it. In the film days hardly anyone complained of lenses misfocusing. Perhaps the quality of digital and the ability to view at 100% on a monitor is making any errors more noticeable.</p>

<p>I am not saying you people are dreaming about these focus issues, I am sure they exist. All I am saying is that it seems to be on the increase and that I have been lucky so far. No need to go mental on me.</p>

[david_amberson1]

<p>Sorry.</p>

<p>The focus issues were complained about here just as much before the Micro adjustment feature as they are now. And it was just as bad everytime someone came on here to mention it and seek advice. The fan boys came out of the wood work and made comments about how it was probably user error and not the equipment.<br>

Fan boys are those who are so loyal to their brand of equipment, they take it personal when someone makes a comment about how something is wrong with it. You know, "My Canon is better than your Nikon"<br>

These people just automatically right out of the box make statements like, "I've never had a problem Maybe its user error. I dont know what your complaining about.<br>

Statements to people who have been photographing for 20 years. Yeah, I dont know how to press a focus button. Like there is a secret on how to press it or you wont get focus right.</p>

<p>You just made the wrong statement at the wrong time. Just look around photo.net. You'll see that everytime someone just as the OP asks a question. Some smart A$% has to make a statement about how his has always been perfect and you shouldnt complain and maybe the user should learn more about photography. I know you didnt make that exact statement. But its getting old and it was time someone headed it off finaly. I remember when the first 1DIII's started getting complained about. Thats all you heard was how it was such a complicated camera and that if you didnt know how to set it up properly, it wouldnt focus right. No one got the benifit of the doubt that there 1DIII was not focusing properly. And there is nothing about the 1DIII's settings/perameters that can make it NOT focus when you press the shutter button. Static subject, focus, click and review. Picture not in focus and some say its camera settings. Its enough to make you explode. When I first brought up my issue. In One Shot, I could point it at the subjects eyes, focus, fire and the image would not be in focus. It was accurate at close distances at one Micro Adj setting but would be completely unusable 8 feet further away. Again, comments like, mine is fine, user error, its a very complex machine etc.</p>

<p>Well I sent it in, and guess what, the day my camera arrived at canon, they came out with this last recall. It arrived on March 3rd. A recall for the one of the very reasons I was complaining. Had I listened to evryone and excepted that I was an "idiot" and couldnt use a camera, it would still be causing focus errors.</p>

<p>These people think they must reply to everry topic thats asked. They dont have to. IF they dont have anything worth adding, they can move on without replying.<br>

Thats all I was trying to get across. You just happened to make the wrong statement at the wrong time. You became a tool to get my point across. Sorry, but its gotta stop. Its evident Canon gear isnt providing the level of quality out of the box it used to. Look at the 5DII. How many updates has it had now and how long has it been on the market. The 50D as well. My Mark III is almost into next model territory and just now delivering the level the hype led one to expect.</p>

<p>Nikon hasnt had near the issues out of their new gear that Canon has had. I dont know much about them, but the D70 focus issue is the only one I can remember being serious and that was many moons ago. I will seriously consider switching if they dont get there act together for the next model. I'm done with the frequent flier back and forth to Canon. Want more proof. Go <a href="http://www.planetneil.com/tangents/2009/04/25/the-best-camera-in-the-world/#more-869">HERE</a> and read the column. Scroll to the top first. Then scroll thru the comments at the bottom....and on the table, he displays why he uses what he uses exclusivley now. And he was an avid Canon user. Owned all the older models right up to the Mark III's. And this guy knows Photography.</p>

<p>Theres no doubt the older stuff had better quality and consistency out of the box. The image quality is better now...when its right.</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

<p>Hi David</p>

<p>I agree that Canon do seem to be behind Nikon regarding reliability of their equipment. I think I have just been really lucky with my gear.</p>

<p>OK, I undertsand what a fan boy is now. You'll be relieved to hear that I am not one of them. I'll pick the best gear for the job and over the last decade it has always been Canon. Nikon now looks a tempting option but I cannot really afford to change. Besides, I have the 5D2 and so far it has been truly excellent.</p>

<p>Glad to hear you've taken a chill pill ;-)</p>

[david_amberson1]

<p>OP...Are you figureing out what you need. Go check out that Lens Align.<br>

Yeah. Chillin is goooooood. I also wouldnt mind switching. But as you stated, cost is huge when you tote this much gear.</p>

<p>I am gonna wait to see how Canon responds to the Nikon slap. This thing goes back and forth, so I dont want to jump ship just yet. If the new model 1D bombs or isnt s usefull upgrade, then I'll move on. Cause by that point, I'll have to wait another 2 years for a chance at a newer model.</p>

<p>Thing is, a D700 in the right hands can produce same IQ as my 1D3 or better. Its half the price, so I am seeing these MOMS with cameras cropping up everywhere. I've seen 2 at baseball games, one at a pageant, one at a play. It doesnt have the speed, but other than that, they could actually get the same quality(provided they can use it right) and these do not. One told me she thought of switching to Canon. She cant get sharp images from her D700/70200 f2.8VR. I thought silently, if you cant get perfect images from that, you cant buy anything to perform better from Canon. Course, I'm not gonna tell her that.</p>

<p>My point being, these MOMS could eventually take business away if they ever figured out how to freeze action with it etc. Most put there cameras down after sunset. If they figured out they could get images too, they wouldnt buy mine.</p>

<p>This is why I need to make sure I am keeping top model gear. I need the ability to produce the best images.</p>

<p>Its so funny right now to see a women with a D700 and Nikon 70-200 f2.8VR taking pictures next to me, and buying my pictures. I feel like I'm stealing hahaha. She could get everything I get.</p>

[matthijs]

<p>Experience counts at least for 50%.</p>

<p>I'd bet if you used a significantly lesser camera/lens combo they'd still buy your pictures.</p>

[david_amberson1]

<p>Maybe so. I sold alot to these people back when I used a Rebel. Thing is, the pics didnt have that crisp pop they do now. And thats what alot of people comment on is how crisp they are compared to theirs.<br>

Sad thing is, they could get the same pop if they knew how to use their equipment....shhhhh:-)<br>

I guess the increase in quality is partley cause the Rebel would only go to ISO 1600 which limited shutter speed. The AF didnt track as well. The images were not as clear of noise. All that is a huge jump from the Rebel XTi from 3 yrs ago to the 1D3. Of course, I had a 40D in between those cameras.</p>

<p>But you're probably right.</p>