Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 17 Dec 2014 (Wednesday) 10:12
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Review WOW!

 
sploo
premature adulation
2,409 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 463
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Apr 19, 2018 17:13 |  #8086

Phoenixkh wrote in post #18609772 (external link)
with my 1D IV... a setting of +5 was all I needed. That said.. I still wasn't thrilled with the results. I'll be trying it on my new camera soon to see how that works out.

How does it fare when focused using liveview? MFA is irrelevant in that scenario, so if images are still unacceptably soft it's unlikely to be an AF issue.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
CyberDyneSystems
THREAD ­ STARTER
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
49,703 posts
Gallery: 160 photos
Likes: 6347
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
Post edited over 1 year ago by CyberDyneSystems.
     
Apr 19, 2018 18:40 |  #8087

Archibald wrote in post #18609731 (external link)
...

It is peculiar that we both need around +13 with that combo, and I think there was someone else who had the same. So maybe that is a rule, that the 100-400 with the 1.4X needs an unusual adjustment. Or maybe not - it could be coincidence.

But if the premise is correct, that the MFA shift needs to be +10 to +15 with the 100-400, then it can't just be random tolerance errors. ....

It is peculiar, but far from a rule. I would argue coincidence as "two, maybe three" seems to be a small minority from where I am sitting.

I would not accept the premise as correct, and thus tolerance error would remain at the top of my list of hypothesis.

Am I missing the part where this was a larger percentage? Maybe I missed it?


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,554 posts
Likes: 7750
Joined Oct 2009
     
Apr 19, 2018 19:32 |  #8088

I believe I read at FM they can calibrate a TC. Maybe I'll call CPS but for the cost you may as well buy a new one.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pondrader
"now I'm no rocket scientist but I do get a shot or two"
Avatar
16,028 posts
Gallery: 2548 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 56885
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Minden, Ontario, Canada
     
Apr 19, 2018 19:33 |  #8089

harryh813 wrote in post #18609607 (external link)
Wow! What a great shot!

Thanks Harry


Jeff ........, 7D, 70-300L, 100-400LII
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,554 posts
Likes: 7750
Joined Oct 2009
     
Apr 19, 2018 19:34 |  #8090

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18609920 (external link)
It is peculiar, but far from a rule. I would argue coincidence as "two, maybe three" seems to be a small minority from where I am sitting.

I would not accept the premise as correct, and thus tolerance error would remain at the top of my list of hypothesis.

Am I missing the part where this was a larger percentage? Maybe I missed it?

It is peculiar and if only a handful then yes a tolerance error in the TC may explain it.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
8,599 posts
Gallery: 387 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 17654
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Apr 19, 2018 19:51 |  #8091

What do others find when doing MFA on the 100-400mm II with 1.4X?


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 77D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LJ3Jim
Goldmember
Avatar
1,055 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 1722
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Pacific Northwest
Post edited over 1 year ago by LJ3Jim.
     
Apr 19, 2018 21:48 |  #8092

Archibald wrote in post #18609962 (external link)
What do others find when doing MFA on the 100-400mm II with 1.4X?

I had both the 7D2 and 100-400 II from the day they were released. I also had the 1.4x III. I never could get consistent results from the 7D2. I had to MFA every time I went out to shoot. I'd pick a tree that was at the distance I expected to shoot, and adjust MFA accordingly. I did tests in my back yard by shooting a fence post. If I took 3 shots with the 7D2 + 1.4x III + 100-400 II, the shots were often not the same. I finally gave up on the 7D2 and got a 1DX2 hoping it would fix my focusing issues. The 1DX2 is only used with the 100-400 II (with or without the 1.4x III). On the 1DX2, MFA is turned off. I've never felt the need to use it at all. I posted the shot below a few days ago, but it is typical of my experience with the 1DX2 + 1.4x III + 100-400 II. The shot was taken with the lens wide open (f/8) and at maximum zoom (560 mm). Using the 100-400 II without the extender gives the same results. I had a love/hate relationship with my 7D2, but the 1DX2 has just been love.

IMAGE: http://www.lj3.com/1dx2/sbz_2.jpg

Image editing ok; C&C always welcome.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
8,599 posts
Gallery: 387 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 17654
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Apr 19, 2018 21:52 |  #8093

LJ3Jim wrote in post #18610008 (external link)
I had both the 7D2 and 100-400 II from the day they were released. I also had the 1.4x III. I never could get consistent results from the 7D2. I had to MFA every time I went out to shoot. I'd pick a tree that was at the distance I expected to shoot, and adjust MFA accordingly. I did tests in my back yard by shooting a fence post. If I took 3 shots with the 7D2 + 1.4x III + 100-400 II, the shots were often not the same. I finally gave up on the 7D2 and got a 1DX2 hoping it would fix my focusing issues. The 1DX2 is only used with the 100-400 II (with or without the 1.4x III). On the 1DX2, MFA is turned off. I've never felt the need to use it at all. I posted the shot below a few days ago, but it is typical of my experience with the 1DX2 + 1.4x III + 100-400 II. The shot was taken with the lens wide open (f/8) and at maximum zoom (560 mm). Using the 100-400 II without the extender gives the same results. I had a love/hate relationship with my 7D2, but the 1DX2 has just been love.

QUOTED IMAGE

Super detail.


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 77D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,554 posts
Likes: 7750
Joined Oct 2009
     
Apr 19, 2018 22:50 |  #8094

LJ3Jim wrote in post #18610008 (external link)
I had both the 7D2 and 100-400 II from the day they were released. I also had the 1.4x III. I never could get consistent results from the 7D2. I had to MFA every time I went out to shoot. I'd pick a tree that was at the distance I expected to shoot, and adjust MFA accordingly. I did tests in my back yard by shooting a fence post. If I took 3 shots with the 7D2 + 1.4x III + 100-400 II, the shots were often not the same. I finally gave up on the 7D2 and got a 1DX2 hoping it would fix my focusing issues. The 1DX2 is only used with the 100-400 II (with or without the 1.4x III). On the 1DX2, MFA is turned off. I've never felt the need to use it at all. I posted the shot below a few days ago, but it is typical of my experience with the 1DX2 + 1.4x III + 100-400 II. The shot was taken with the lens wide open (f/8) and at maximum zoom (560 mm). Using the 100-400 II without the extender gives the same results. I had a love/hate relationship with my 7D2, but the 1DX2 has just been love.

QUOTED IMAGE

That is why I sent mine to Canon twice.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Phoenixkh
a mere speck
6,829 posts
Gallery: 67 photos
Likes: 1435
Joined May 2011
Location: Gainesville, Florida
     
Apr 20, 2018 01:05 |  #8095

sploo wrote in post #18609886 (external link)
How does it fare when focused using liveview? MFA is irrelevant in that scenario, so if images are still unacceptably soft it's unlikely to be an AF issue.

I'll have to try that. I've never used live view with the 1D IV. For some reason, I thought its live view was pretty far away from the current designs. I used to use the live view on my 70D... hardly ever with my 7D2.


Kim (the male variety) Canon 1DX2 | 1D IV | 16-35 f/4 IS | 24-105 f/4 IS | 100L IS macro | 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II | 100-400Lii | 50 f/1.8 STM | Canon 1.4X III
RRS tripod and monopod | 580EXII | Cinch 1 & Loop 3 Special Edition | Editing Encouraged

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,409 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 463
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Apr 20, 2018 02:17 |  #8096

Phoenixkh wrote in post #18610067 (external link)
I'll have to try that. I've never used live view with the 1D IV. For some reason, I thought its live view was pretty far away from the current designs. I used to use the live view on my 70D... hardly ever with my 7D2.

I've never used the 1D IV, but I assume it'll be using contrast AF in liveview; it's slow, but should generally be very accurate.

MFA is only to correct for differences between the lens-to-imaging-sensor vs lens-to-AF-sensor paths (when using phase AF through the viewfinder). When using liveview (even the modern dual pixel AF) the AF sensor is the imaging sensor, so if the image is in focus on the AF sensor, it's in focus on the imaging sensor (which may not be true when focusing through the viewfinder).

If things look OK with liveview, it may be an MFA issue. If not, then it may be a dodgy TC (though they will always have some hit on quality anyway).


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,409 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 463
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Apr 20, 2018 02:24 |  #8097

digital paradise wrote in post #18609949 (external link)
I believe I read at FM they can calibrate a TC. Maybe I'll call CPS but for the cost you may as well buy a new one.

It would be interesting to know if CPS could tweak a body + TC + lens combo; such that with or without the TC you'd need 0 MFA. They can certainly do it without a TC, and I've also previously had them tweak a faulty lens but leave a body alone (so I didn't have to re-MFA all my other lenses). When they tune a lens + body pair to 0 MFA I don't know if they tweak both together (i.e. a perfect match, even if both aren't individually perfect) or whether they hand tweak both to 0. Perhaps the latter come to think of it; as I've had CPS tweak one body plus two different lenses, all to 0 MFA.

Having discussed AF issues with a CPS guy in London I understand they have software that allows them to check and tweak MFA values on each AF point separately, but the guy said that some of what they did was reasonably automated, and they didn't usually have to open a body up to do the calibration.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,554 posts
Likes: 7750
Joined Oct 2009
     
Apr 20, 2018 07:48 |  #8098

sploo wrote in post #18610079 (external link)
It would be interesting to know if CPS could tweak a body + TC + lens combo; such that with or without the TC you'd need 0 MFA. They can certainly do it without a TC, and I've also previously had them tweak a faulty lens but leave a body alone (so I didn't have to re-MFA all my other lenses). When they tune a lens + body pair to 0 MFA I don't know if they tweak both together (i.e. a perfect match, even if both aren't individually perfect) or whether they hand tweak both to 0. Perhaps the latter come to think of it; as I've had CPS tweak one body plus two different lenses, all to 0 MFA.

Having discussed AF issues with a CPS guy in London I understand they have software that allows them to check and tweak MFA values on each AF point separately, but the guy said that some of what they did was reasonably automated, and they didn't usually have to open a body up to do the calibration.

MFA is an electrical adjustment. If you adjust it with the menus the sensor does not move. The algorithms just change. When Canon calibrates there are both mechanical and electrical adjustments. I don't think they need to take the camera apart in every case. There is a special tool to adjust the sensor position. I found blogs where people were adjusting the sensor position on their own before MFA came out. Canon New Jersey was waiting for that tool when member at FM sent his 7D2 there shortly after it's release. I waited until it arrived before I sent it in.

If you had two lenses adjusted to one body then I imagine they adjusted the sensor to spec and then each lens to the camera. If they can calibrate a TC then I suppose getting it to zero with and without a TC should be possible.

I had a picture of a Canon service facility and there were long rails with a table. The camera and lens were placed on the table and they moved it to various distances from the target when calibrating. I wish I could find it. Not sure if they still do that or it is on the work bench and they use a computer.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,554 posts
Likes: 7750
Joined Oct 2009
     
Apr 20, 2018 07:52 |  #8099

Phoenixkh wrote in post #18610067 (external link)
I'll have to try that. I've never used live view with the 1D IV. For some reason, I thought its live view was pretty far away from the current designs. I used to use the live view on my 70D... hardly ever with my 7D2.

I'll tape a bill on the wall. Take a few shots in LV and then 10 in phase detect. I defocus between shots. There will be slight deviation using PD which is normal for cameras with mirrors but it will tell what is going on.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,409 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 463
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Apr 20, 2018 11:25 |  #8100

digital paradise wrote in post #18610181 (external link)
MFA is an electrical adjustment. If you adjust it with the menus the sensor does not move. The algorithms just change. When Canon calibrates there are both mechanical and electrical adjustments. I don't think they need to take the camera apart in every case. There is a special tool to adjust the sensor position. I found blogs where people were adjusting the sensor position on their own before MFA came out. Canon New Jersey was waiting for that tool when member at FM sent his 7D2 there shortly after it's release. I waited until it arrived before I sent it in.

If you had two lenses adjusted to one body then I imagine they adjusted the sensor to spec and then each lens to the camera. If they can calibrate a TC then I suppose getting it to zero with and without a TC should be possible.

I had a picture of a Canon service facility and there were long rails with a table. The camera and lens were placed on the table and they moved it to various distances from the target when calibrating. I wish I could find it. Not sure if they still do that or it is on the work bench and they use a computer.

I suppose if there's a secondary MFA set up within the firmware then they could modify what appears to the user as the zero point. Certainly it'd have to be an internal electrical (or rather, firmware) adjustment if they can adjust each AF point independently (as claimed to me by a CPS guy)

It would be interesting to know how often CPS do actually physically adjust a sensor. I guess it would be much more preferable to avoid opening a body if possible.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,945,238 views & 32,462 likes for this thread
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Review WOW!
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Dman780
1001 guests, 343 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.