Before a recent wedding shoot (wasn't the main photographer), I had calibrated my lenses and bodies, including a 5D3 and the 24-105 lens with the center point. In most of my shots, there is a slight front focus in each of them. In upper body and head shots, the focus is good or the OOF is very close to the intended point of focus so the photos are acceptable. For full body shots (where longer camera to subject distances exaggerate AF misfocus errors), most of the photos are unacceptable. AF'ing on someone's face rendered focus on the hands resting in front of them, or their shoulder if they were standing at an angle.
Realizing that I used the outer cross points most of the time, thought had occurred to me to try comparing the AFMA values for the center (which I had already calibrated correctly) and the outer cross points I'd used. Using Reikan's FoCal tool, I consistently get around a -3 AFMA setting difference when comparing the center to a couple of outer cross points, which makes sense since they were causing front focus. Then using FoCal's multi point focus analysis tool, the results show those outer points around 75% of the focus quality of the center point (when using an AFMA value calibrated for the center point).
Since AFMA adjustments are global and can't be adjusted per AF point by us, is this something that a Canon repair facility can fix? OOF from an f/4 lens was noticeable, it would have been even worse had I used a faster lens. I don't mind if all of the AF points as a whole were off 5 or 10 AFMA settings to a lens, since I can adjust. But if there are AFMA variations between different AF points, how can some points be trusted? Has anyone had a similar experience where different AF points behaved differently? The AF systems in the 1DX and the 5D3 are supposed to be Canon's best and the costs reflect, am I unreasonable in expecting a tighter tolerance?