Microadjust Software for 5D2

Could it be camera movement/vibration? How sturdy is the tripod/head and is it on solid ground?

I don't think so. Target is outside mounted securely, camera is indoors on a very good tripod/head. EV is over 13, tons of light falling on the target. IS is off.

No other lens has such weird trends as this one does at 200mm... If I do it at 70mm, 135mm, etc... Its fine. At 200mm, I get wacked out trends.

Real world results? No problems that I have noticed myself really.

Try increasing the mirror lock-up time just to make sure there's no mirror vibration.

Ill give that a try! Thanks.

Well I ran the test (3) more times at 200mm, and (1) more time at 70mm. I increased mirror lockup to 2.5 seconds and light was a little less extreme (EV at around 9.5 I believe it was).

First test failed:

I'm finding if the target is too big in the frame ( 80% or more in the frame ) I get inconsistent readings. Try the smaller target and increase the mirror lockup to 4 secs.

interesting

Johnny V wrote in post #14614108
I'm finding if the target is too big in the frame ( 80% or more in the frame ) I get inconsistent readings. Try the smaller target and increase the mirror lockup to 4 secs.

The target is actually quite small in the frame as is. The new style target only comes in one size as well (you print however big you want it though). It is about 25ft away on a normal 8.5x11" sheet of paper. So I doubt the size is the issue.

I am going to play around with the +1 value I got today a few times and see if all looks well. If so I won't worry about it until the next time I run that lens again

I plan to check with it with the TC tomorrow, though. Curious to see how they compare to values I already have.

Have you tried it per the developers distance recommendations? ie. 6m (40x) for 200mm as opposed to the 7.5m you have been testing at?

Here's his recommendations: https://dl.dropbox.com …20Test%20Distan​ce_1.0.pdf

Invertalon wrote in post #14614260
The target is actually quite small in the frame as is. The new style target only comes in one size as well (you print however big you want it though). It is about 25ft away on a normal 8.5x11" sheet of paper. So I doubt the size is the issue.

I am going to play around with the +1 value I got today a few times and see if all looks well. If so I won't worry about it until the next time I run that lens again

I plan to check with it with the TC tomorrow, though. Curious to see how they compare to values I already have.

Re-ran the test this morning and actually got good looking results. I guess I was too far away from the target. Just moving up two feet made for MUCH better results. Normal, precise focus points on the test result curve.

So if I want to run it at longer distances, I have to print the target out larger. If it is too small the results get really wacky.

Ran the test for times this morning and got +2, +2, +5 and +2 - All at slightly different distances (+/- a foot or so).

I haven't had time to run the newest version, but it used to come with 2 targets, one small and one large. It only has one now? Used to be the small one was for small lenses, and the large was for zooms or big primes.

Yes, the new version has one single target. You can print it at any size and you just measure the width of the target you printed and input that into the settings.

I thought my 24-105 was pretty nice on my 5d2 body and just ran it through. +4 and its looking a lot better.

How accurate are the outer focus points calibrations? Has anyone tried them?

Well my 24/70 seems to calibrate out at around -4 at the wide end and +2 at the long end. What to do now? Go for -1 as that's in the middle? I don't think I favour the wide or the long, my shots seem to fall across the focal length of the lens. Thoughts?