Are wide apertures useless without microadjust?

I recently made a big upgrade (body and several lenses) into the world of DSLR and I would be incredibly happy except for the fact that I can't use wide apertures due to repeatable problems with acquiring focus. I started out with a Canon T3i, but I noticed that in many pictures the main subject (directly under the center AF point which was manually selected - verified in DPP) was slightly out of focus. Not completely blurry, but enough to spoil the shot. I also noticed that objects well outside of the AF point, which were slightly closer or slightly farther, were in amazingly crisp focus. At the time, I didn't know the terms "front focus" or "back focus".

Thinking that the 60D would have better focus due to its improved focus sensors, I changed from the T3i to the 60D. I still found myself with the same problem. Especially when taking portraits and candids, the subject's face was always a bit fuzzy while another part of the frame was in sharp focus. Eventually I realized two things: first, the part of the frame that was in focus varied based on the lens I was using. Second, the problem was worse at wide apertures due to the shallow depth of field. Obviously that second one goes without saying, but I point it out to show that I understand how DOF varies with aperture size.

As I started to read about this problem, I learned the terms "front focus" and "back focus". At that point I was able to say that the Canon 50mm 1.8 II lens was front focusing, the Sigma 30mm 1.4 lens was front focusing (but not as much as the 50mm), and the Tokina 16-50mm 2.8 lens was back focusing. The two kit lenses (Canon 18-55 and 55-250) were pretty close in terms of focus. The 18-55 was front focusing a tiny bit and the 55-250 was basically spot on. Of course the 18-55 and 55-250 have smaller maximum apertures, so that probably makes any focus error less apparent.

All of these focus issues are noticeable in real-life situations and are extremely apparent in contrived scenarios such as setting up batteries or other identical contrasty objects. I don't think it's a problem with my technique, because I can set up a test with the body on a tripod, and I can reproduce the focus characteristics 100% of the time by changing lenses. If I put the 50mm 1.8 on, it will focus on the front object even though the AF point is on the middle object. If I replace it with the 16-50, it will focus on the back object even though the AF point is on the middle object. First time, second time, every time. And this wouldn't matter except for the fact that the same problem manifests itself in real-life shooting.

After investing about $2,500 in camera gear, I can't get sharp photos at wide apertures because the lenses won't focus where they are supposed to. Of course I can stop them down to f/8 and make the problem disappear. But if I wanted to shoot at that exposure, I would just go back to my P&S.

So my question is this: are wide apertures useless without the ability to microadjust? In other words, do I need at least a 7D if I want to actually get photos that are focused on the object at the AF point? I don't think it's a body defect since I saw the same problem with the T3i and the 60D. And I don't think it's a problem with my technique, since I can predict the exact focus error of any shot almost 100% of the time. What should I do here? And a bigger question is, why would Canon even sell a body that doesn't allow these glaring problems to be corrected?

The 50d has my micro adjust also.
You can also send your gear into Canon and they can adjust
It for you.
I hope you get it sorted.

Lens front/back focus problems have been always around. Before Camera manufacturers introduced micro-adjustment capable bodies, people were normally either doing exhange/return a lot to hunt for an issue free copy or sending in the lens and the body to the lens service center to fix the problem.

So, the short answer to your question is "no". But I will never buy a body that's without micro-adjustment.

So sorry to hear you're having trouble.

As said above, front/back focus has always been around, and perhaps more importantly, lenses do "go bad" due to a gradual loosening of the mount. Some are worse than others, but if you consider the precision engineering required to ensure each lens is exactly perpendicular to the mount, and therefore the sensor, you can imagine that it's a problem unlikely to go away.

Solutions?
Well, Canon will adjust your lenses to work with your 60D within certain tolorences. If/when you change the body, this can/will all go to pot!

You can also consider swapping to a 7D or any body which offers MA.

You've also stated that you can predict the misfocus. So, is it possible to do so in real-life situations? If so, can you choose an appropriate place to focus? Or are we talking "waaaaay off"?

And distance-to-subject has a large bearing, too.

Too wide an aperture at too close a distance, for many, will be tough to nail. Just ask anyone with a 50L f/1.2 lens. Similarly, ask anyone who shoots a lot of macro.

Personally, if the focus is so bad, and if you're within your guarantee period, I recommend considering changing body......

Regards,
Simon

you can always manual focus.

photog9 wrote in post #13912453
So my question is this: are wide apertures useless without the ability to microadjust?

FWIW, I own several fast lenses, shoot wide open or close to it very often, and I've never used the micro adjust on any of my camera.

Recent example, shot at f/1.2, focused on her eye, click for much larger

IMAGE LINK: http://www.timnosenzop​hoto.com …rkshopCTWedding​004-X3.jpg

Looks like something with camera or using of it.
I have 35F2, 100F2, 50 1.8, 28-75 2.8 on 500D and 5D, no MA and no needs for it so far.
At F1.8-2 I need to focus exactly on the part which I need to be in focus, at F2.8 also if object is very close.

photog9 wrote in post #13912453
After investing about $2,500 in camera gear, I can't get sharp photos at wide apertures because the lenses won't focus where they are supposed to.

You're getting off cheap .. I've about $25,000 invested in camera gear and still have focus problems at very wide apertures

In ideal situations such as high contrast stationary targets in good light and with good technique your percentage of in-focus shots should be fairly high .. 95% or better even using the off-center focus points properly.

But with low contrast or moving targets (or moving photographers), or in backlit lighting situations your percentage will drop a bit .. how much depends on your technique. Even breathing can induce enough body movement to make your pics slightly out-of-focus. At wider apertures the depth of field is often very narrow and the slightest movement can spoil the photo.

First off establish if your lenses & bodies (and not you) are the problem by shooting test targets with a tripod & timer .. if they are off by a consistent amount use the micro-adjust feature to bring them in focus. That way you will know if your equipment or technique is to blame.

While I readily admit the OP may have some lens issues, I think that this thread (and other like unto it) are more a product of our pixel-peeping, computer/software fixated generation of photographers.

Sharpness in all situations has become the "golden cow" that everyone bows down and worships when in reality if you just went out and shot and enjoyed the photos for what they were we'd all be a lot more satisfied with our equipment and our results.

I have never micro-adjusted a body nor sent a lens in for an issue in my life and have ALWAYS enjoyed the results of my photography.

(Please also take note that the OP mentions two kit level lenses and the Nifty Fifty. There might be a bit of a case of high expectations for low money here.)

timnosenzo wrote in post #13914572
FWIW, I own several fast lenses, shoot wide open or close to it very often, and I've never used the micro adjust on any of my camera.

Recent example, shot at f/1.2, focused on her eye, click for much larger

Are you focus/recomposing, or choosing the appropriate focus point?

I'm choosing a focus point and keeping it in the same place. No recomposing.

Looking at your example, that is a shot I would be happy with. If I took the same photo with my 50mm 1.8, I can predict with almost complete certainty that the man's left shoulder would be in focus. If I put the Tokina 16-50 on and took that photo at 50mm, the woman's earring would be in focus. The Sigma 30mm (different focal length I know) would probably get the tip of her nose in perfect focus.

Have you sent your lenses/body in for adjustment, or are they all straight out of the box?

bauerman wrote in post #13915022
While I readily admit the OP may have some lens issues, I think that this thread (and other like unto it) are more a product of our pixel-peeping, computer/software fixated generation of photographers.

Sharpness in all situations has become the "golden cow" that everyone bows down and worships when in reality if you just went out and shot and enjoyed the photos for what they were we'd all be a lot more satisfied with our equipment and our results.

I have never micro-adjusted a body nor sent a lens in for an issue in my life and have ALWAYS enjoyed the results of my photography.

(Please also take note that the OP mentions two kit level lenses and the Nifty Fifty. There might be a bit of a case of high expectations for low money here.)

I can see the focus issues at regular screen resolution. Obviously they are much more obvious at 100%. It's a bit frustrating to see almost no fine detail in the desired subject and sharp focus in another part of the photo. If the focus were off by an unpredictable amount every now and then, I could blame myself or chalk it up to cheap lenses occasionally making an error. But when I can predict the focus error almost every time, it makes me wonder how anyone can use wide apertures without microadjustment.

photog9 wrote in post #13912453
why would Canon even sell a body that doesn't allow these glaring problems to be corrected?

I think you got the short straw in the lottery.

https://www.lensrental​s.com …s-is-soft-and-other-myths

mmahoney wrote in post #13914919
First off establish if your lenses & bodies (and not you) are the problem by shooting test targets with a tripod & timer .. if they are off by a consistent amount use the micro-adjust feature to bring them in focus. That way you will know if your equipment or technique is to blame.

I did that. The focus error is predictable 100% of the time when using a tripod and remote shutter release. I would microadjust them, except for the fact that I have a 60D.

skygod44 wrote in post #13912778
You can also consider swapping to a 7D or any body which offers MA.

You've also stated that you can predict the misfocus. So, is it possible to do so in real-life situations? If so, can you choose an appropriate place to focus? Or are we talking "waaaaay off"?

Personally, if the focus is so bad, and if you're within your guarantee period, I recommend considering changing body......

I bought the camera from a local dealer, and they don't sell products for evaluation. So I can't bring it back for a 7D just because I changed my mind and want more features. I'm trying to figure out if I can compensate for these focusing errors by choosing a different focus point. It's not way off, but it's off enough to be noticeable.

Ive found it depends on the lens. I had a 50 1.8 on my 5D and had to sell it as it missed focus and the 5D didnt have microiadjust. Now on my 5dii my sigma 85 needed a microadjustment but my 35L doesnt. Sounds like you have been unlucky with your lenses