5D3: AFMA variations between different AF points

Hi all

So I've done some tests with FoCal. Not exactly sure what the results mean, so was hoping you guys might be able to help out there...?

This is one of the test results...

what does this mean, are these typical results? would you be ok with these results if it were you?

this is the multipoint test done with no AFMA -so set to 0...

and this is AF consistancy:

michelle blossom tree wrote in post #15270440
Hi all

So I've done some tests with FoCal. Not exactly sure what the results mean, so was hoping you guys might be able to help out there...?

This is one of the test results...

what does this mean, are these typical results? would you be ok with these results if it were you?

Not sure what the chart shows so I can't say, but...

michelle blossom tree wrote in post #15270484
this is the multipoint test done with no AFMA -so set to 0...

... that picture says it all really. I don't think I'd be happy with that.

Have you run the test with other lenses? There's always the possibility that it's a lens issue until you see a pattern of behavior that is consistent across all your lenses.

donp2112 wrote in post #15254583
Second try...AFMA results with 85 1.8.

Wow, that just looks purrrrfect!

donp2112 wrote in post #15254583
Second try...AFMA results with 85 1.8.

WoW! why are your numbers so high (in the 1000's?) and my highest is 334? Is that relative to different focal length or is my focus really that much lower quality?

s2kdriver80 wrote in post #15253269
Just sent in both of my 5D3s yesterday along with the 24-105. We'll see what comes of it.

When are you expecting these back? Would really love to see if there is improvement for you!!

Yohan Pamudji wrote in post #15270778
Not sure what the chart shows so I can't say, but...

... that picture says it all really. I don't think I'd be happy with that.

Have you run the test with other lenses? There's always the possibility that it's a lens issue until you see a pattern of behavior that is consistent across all your lenses.

Thanks Yohan, after seeing that 85 result I am really not impressed with my result! I will test my 100mm tomorrow and see how it compares...

Ok, so I sent in both of my 5D3s and my 24-105 last Thursday, arrived at Canon NJ Friday morning. Monday I call the NJ office to see how the repairs were going and when I could expect them back since it would be great to have them in time for Thanksgiving. Fools didn't even open the box yet and it was still sitting at their warehouse since Friday morning. What's the point of placing the CPS decal on the outside of the box for express service as indicated in their instructions if my shipment falls through the cracks and gets left in their receiving bay for an entire day doing nothing? Anyway whatever, I let it slide. I figured if they fix the AF issues, what's a little delay right?

So as Tuesday rolls around, it becomes evident that I won't be receiving my gear in time for the holidays. I called them and offered to drive all the way from Long Island to pick them up in NJ on Wednesday, even though the CPS return shipping is free. I fought the worst traffic of the year and finally arrived at the NJ office. I went 100 miles in 4 hours, driving manual in bumper to bumper gridlock.

The lady returned my gear and the work order forms. "Electrical adjustments were carried out on the af assembly. Product functions were confirmed. Checked all, adjusted focus & exposure, f&b, cleaned to factory specs. Cleaned C-mos & adjusted with lens." That's it. I asked if I could have the tech notes and she said she didn't have them. "Electrical adjustments" are meaningless to me lol. I want to know which AF points were adjusted and by how much and whatever else was done. This way, I would know if the tech was on the right track and if my issue ever needs to be revisited by that tech or another tech, they would know the history of the work that was done. Surely these techs keep notes, right?

So I brave the traffic back to Long Island and was eager to run the bodies through some basic testing. I set up the FoCal target, 12EV halogen brightness, 40x focal length, tested 105mm at f/4. Center point AFMA now yields +5 wtf lol! Whatever, if all of the AF points are around +5, I'll live with it. I then tested the upper-right-most outer cross point. +11. In other words, not only is my center point a +5 now (was 0 before), there is now at least a 6 AFMA units of difference between my center point and the outer point I mentioned - more than before.

I stopped the testing right then and there, no point in continuing with other AF points or with the second body. These tests are time-consuming and I don't think I should be the one doing this after receiving a "fixed" product. This is the reason I want to see all of the tech's notes, including what was done to fix the AF and also their findings and observations during the quality check. Since this is free warranty work, do you think these guys do haphazard, non-involved work and hope the customer just lives with the issues and pray they don't come back a second time? Or did I just get a bad tech? Just trying to fathom how this could have happened. Seeing such poor results, I just don't see how the tech could have signed off on the quality check. Doing the "electrical adjustments" implies and is an admission that he found some fault with the AF. So the result is worse and he is ok with it and verifies the work to be handed back to the customer? I don't get it. Now I have to waste more time and more money returning my gear to the repair center again. Any word of advice on what/how I should phrase my repair form?

Anyway, Happy Thanksgiving to all who celebrate. In the grand scheme of things, these cameras are insignificant compared to other more important things in life and we should be constantly thankful for what we have, just a little annoyed that they half-assed the work when it didn't need to be that way.

s2kdriver80 wrote in post #15275028
Ok, so I sent in both of my 5D3s and my 24-105 last Thursday, arrived at Canon NJ Friday morning. Monday I call the NJ office to see how the repairs were going and when I could expect them back since it would be great to have them in time for Thanksgiving. Fools didn't even open the box yet and it was still sitting at their warehouse since Friday morning. What's the point of placing the CPS decal on the outside of the box for express service as indicated in their instructions if my shipment falls through the cracks and gets left in their receiving bay for an entire day doing nothing? Anyway whatever, I let it slide. I figured if they fix the AF issues, what's a little delay right?

So as Tuesday rolls around, it becomes evident that I won't be receiving my gear in time for the holidays. I called them and offered to drive all the way from Long Island to pick them up in NJ on Wednesday, even though the CPS return shipping is free. I fought the worst traffic of the year and finally arrived at the NJ office. I went 100 miles in 4 hours, driving manual in bumper to bumper gridlock.

The lady returned my gear and the work order forms. "Electrical adjustments were carried out on the af assembly. Product functions were confirmed. Checked all, adjusted focus & exposure, f&b, cleaned to factory specs. Cleaned C-mos & adjusted with lens." That's it. I asked if I could have the tech notes and she said she didn't have them. "Electrical adjustments" are meaningless to me lol. I want to know which AF points were adjusted and by how much and whatever else was done. This way, I would know if the tech was on the right track and if my issue ever needs to be revisited by that tech or another tech, they would know the history of the work that was done. Surely these techs keep notes, right?

So I brave the traffic back to Long Island and was eager to run the bodies through some basic testing. I set up the FoCal target, 12EV halogen brightness, 40x focal length, tested 105mm at f/4. Center point AFMA now yields +5 wtf lol! Whatever, if all of the AF points are around +5, I'll live with it. I then tested the upper-right-most outer cross point. +11. In other words, not only is my center point a +5 now (was 0 before), there is now at least a 6 AFMA units of difference between my center point and the outer point I mentioned - more than before.

I stopped the testing right then and there, no point in continuing with other AF points or with the second body. These tests are time-consuming and I don't think I should be the one doing this after receiving a "fixed" product. This is the reason I want to see all of the tech's notes, including what was done to fix the AF and also their findings and observations during the quality check. Since this is free warranty work, do you think these guys do haphazard, non-involved work and hope the customer just lives with the issues and pray they don't come back a second time? Or did I just get a bad tech? Just trying to fathom how this could have happened. Seeing such poor results, I just don't see how the tech could have signed off on the quality check. Doing the "electrical adjustments" implies and is an admission that he found some fault with the AF. So the result is worse and he is ok with it and verifies the work to be handed back to the customer? I don't get it. Now I have to waste more time and more money returning my gear to the repair center again. Any word of advice on what/how I should phrase my repair form?

Anyway, Happy Thanksgiving to all who celebrate. In the grand scheme of things, these cameras are insignificant compared to other more important things in life and we should be constantly thankful for what we have, just a little annoyed that they half-assed the work when it didn't need to be that way.

oh no! so sorry to hear it's now worse!! I hope it gets sorted properly next time!! keep us posted...

michelle blossom tree wrote in post #15270440
Hi all

So I've done some tests with FoCal. Not exactly sure what the results mean, so was hoping you guys might be able to help out there...?

This is one of the test results...

what does this mean, are these typical results? would you be ok with these results if it were you?

This test doesn't look any good. This doesn't look like fully automated test either, choose automated but you will have to set AFMA manually.

Focus is 70%, needs to be much higher than that. Check your settings, confirm the target is centered, lighting adequate (~10EV), proper distance, etc. This test is highly suspect, start over..

michelle blossom tree wrote in post #15270484
this is the multipoint test done with no AFMA -so set to 0...

This is exactly what I see if I'm too close to the target. 25 to 50X focal length should produce more accurate results.

michelle blossom tree wrote in post #15271307
WoW! why are your numbers so high (in the 1000's?) and my highest is 334? Is that relative to different focal length or is my focus really that much lower quality?

I wouldn't pay too much attention to absolute values, but if the distance isn't right and/or lighting adequate, target centered and squared, etc. then numbers tend to be lower. Higher does seem better but relative values are more important.

From the test you posted if you fix some of the problems I would expect the Qs to go up.

s2kdriver80 wrote in post #15275028
Any word of advice on what/how I should phrase my repair form?

I am sorry you have to go through this, what a pain. I would send them a copy of your Focal results so they KNOW you are going to test it thoroughly and so they know what you are expecting to see.

What did you tell them the first time around? If I had sent mine, I was going to word it as "if I MA for the center point, it causes the side points to be out of adjustment" and send photos of exactly what is happening.

That said, I am not suprised that it isn't fixed on the first try. It's a very disappointing result, though.

Michelle - how much light do you have on your test chart? It should say how many EV's you have during testing. More EV's will make your resolution #'s better. Could be that you need more light. Also be sure to save the test results and look through them. I noticed on one of my test charts that I was having a glare issue, and it affected results. I had to change to a matte paper instead of luster and re-run the tests to make sure the results were correct.

My 50/1.4 had numbers in the 900-1000 range with ~9.5 EV light, and better than that once I moved my setup where I had closer to ~12-13 EV's based on natural light.