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 EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 05 Sep 2018 (Wednesday) 02:31
Search threadPrev/next
POLL: "How's the new EOS-R stack up for you?"
It's Amazing!
69
26.5%
It's kind of a let down
88
33.8%
It's trash
22
8.5%
It's good for the price
61
23.5%
It helped me pick a new body
20
7.7%

189 voters, 260 votes given (3 choices choices can be voted per member)). VOTING IS FOR MEMBERS ONLY.
BROWSE ALL POLLS
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

EOS-R - It's out. Thoughts?

 
this thread is locked
john ­ crossley
Goldmember
2,430 posts
Likes: 729
Joined Nov 2009
     
Oct 15, 2018 14:47 |  #1861

mcoren wrote in post #18729540 (external link)
Thank you, Dave. I understand how AFMA works, really. My question is more about why it differs for each lens. See my post #1857.
Mike

Because of variations within the tolerances.


Football is a very simple game. Twenty-two players chase a ball and Germany always win.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
12,896 posts
Gallery: 142 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3351
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post edited 5 months ago by Tom Reichner.
     
Oct 15, 2018 14:59 |  #1862

mcoren wrote in post #18729540 (external link)
Thank you, Dave. I understand how AFMA works, really. My question is more about why it differs for each lens. See my post #1857.
Mike

.
It differs for each lens because the exact point at which the rays of light converge (in relation to the camera's AF sensor and image sensor) will vary according to the lens mount tolerances, the body mount tolerances, and the tolerances of optical elements themselves.

It's not really about the distance between the AF sensor and the image sensor. It's much more about the difference between the point where light ray convergence takes place in relation to the AF sensor ...... which of course varies with every lens and at every point of adjustment within the lens, such as focal length (on zooms) and subject-to-camera distance. Whenever the elements within the lens move, in relation to one another, the point of convergence can change a wee little bit.

This is why MFA is all about the lenses and has practically nothing to do with the body. . MFA is not really about tolerances within the body - somehow you got the wrong idea about that. . I mean, yeah, it has a tiny little bit to do with the distance between the mount and the AF sensor, but that is just a tiny little thing compared to the variation in lens tolerances, regarding the point of convergence.


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
49,437 posts
Gallery: 156 photos
Likes: 5991
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
Post edited 5 months ago by CyberDyneSystems.
     
Oct 15, 2018 16:34 |  #1863

sploo wrote in post #18729126 (external link)
..

Anyway... the point of my waffle is that I'm surprised no one has made a RAID1 SD card - e.g. a 128GB card that actually has 256GB of storage; and everything is written twice. ....

Murphy's Law: Guess what would be the first thing to fail?
Of course, that fancy RAID controller chip :)


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WilsonFlyer
Senior Member
580 posts
Likes: 228
Joined Mar 2011
Post edited 5 months ago by WilsonFlyer. (2 edits in all)
     
Oct 15, 2018 17:39 |  #1864

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18729622 (external link)
Murphy's Law: Guess what would be the first thing to fail?
Of course, that fancy RAID controller chip :)

I'm actually responding to the OP. I can't find it now and didn't have time when I saw it this morning.

SDXC RAID 0 has already been mocked-up in several labs. RAID 5 has also been done as a performance enhancement. It's just a matter of time and getting cost performance to acceptable values. It won't be as long as you might think. I wouldn't be surprised to see RAID 0 as early as mid-'19. RAID 1 isn't really on the radar screen for a number of reasons.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mccamli
Senior Member
Avatar
589 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 538
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Perth, WA
     
Oct 15, 2018 18:06 |  #1865

I think Tom has explained the reason for lens related MFA well.

If cameras and lenses were designed perfectly, when you take a picture, the camera would tell the lens to move the light that is converging on the focusing plane exactly the right distance so that it converges on the sensor when an image is taken.

If the camer's sensor has been mounted somewhere else, say exactly +4 MFA steps away from perfect, then a single MFA of +4 would correct everything. When the shot is taken, the camera would tell the lens to move the converging beams of light exactly 4 MFA steps further.

However, lenses aren't perfect. Say you have a lens that, when it's told to move the converging beams of light from the focusing plane to the sensor's plane, instead consistently moves the converging beams exactly +3 MFA steps further. You would need a specific MFA for that lens.

You may even have a zoom lens, say a 70-200mm that when it's at 70mm sends the converging beams +3 MFA units further than it was told to but when it's at 200mm it sends those converging beams +10 MFA units further than it was told to. The camera will need at least 2MFA numbers to try to correct this lens, one for the wide end and one for the telephoto end.


Flickr (external link)
500PX (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcoren
Senior Member
Avatar
624 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 303
Joined Mar 2015
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
     
Oct 15, 2018 18:13 |  #1866

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18729566 (external link)
.
It differs for each lens because the exact point at which the rays of light converge (in relation to the camera's AF sensor and image sensor) will vary according to the lens mount tolerances, the body mount tolerances, and the tolerances of optical elements themselves.

It's not really about the distance between the AF sensor and the image sensor. It's much more about the difference between the point where light ray convergence takes place in relation to the AF sensor ...... which of course varies with every lens and at every point of adjustment within the lens, such as focal length (on zooms) and subject-to-camera distance. Whenever the elements within the lens move, in relation to one another, the point of convergence can change a wee little bit.

This is why MFA is all about the lenses and has practically nothing to do with the body. . MFA is not really about tolerances within the body - somehow you got the wrong idea about that. . I mean, yeah, it has a tiny little bit to do with the distance between the mount and the AF sensor, but that is just a tiny little thing compared to the variation in lens tolerances, regarding the point of convergence.

.

Thank you for attempting to provide a reasonable answer! That's more informative than people just repeating "because the AF sensor and the image sensor are in different places."

I think what's confusing me is that I thought the point at which the rays of light converge *is* the focal point, and AF is trying to place that right on the image sensor surface. Maybe that's where I'm mistaken, because I believe there's also a point where the rays converge inside the lens (where the aperture stop is located).

I understand that things change as you zoom, which is why most zooms aren't parfocal across their range. Also, the light from distant objects converges at a different point than the light from nearby objects, which is why focus adjustment is needed in the first place.

I didn't mean to imply that I thought AFMA was about the distance between the AF sensor and the image sensor. It's about the *difference* in the distance that the light has to travel to each one from the lens. I tried to use the word "difference" in my earlier postings where necessary.

I don't mean to hijack this thread for something that's obviously crystal clear the 20,000 other POTN users (or however many).

Mike


Canon EOS 7D Mark II, EOS M5, and EOS 100 (film SLR)
A bunch of Canon lenses and a couple of Sigmas
A backpack, a bicycle, and a pair of hiking boots

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,362 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2390
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Oct 15, 2018 18:18 |  #1867

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18728611 (external link)
.

.
I must be an exception. . "No need to MFA" means nothing to me at all. . Heck, I only attempted to MFA a lens once, and it ended up not needing any adjustment at all. . No lens I've used needed any MFA. . They're all exactly "on", without exception. . And I am a pixel-peeper extraordinaire.

I am so sick of people telling me, "try MFA - you'll be very surprised at the difference." . No, I won't be surprised at all. . If every lens really does focus exactly where I put the focus point, then what good can MFA possibly do for me?

So since I never ever had to MFA any lens that I use, then what advantage would it be to not have to do so? . There are a lot of advantages for mirrorless for the way I shoot, but MFA-free shooting is not one of them.

I would bet that over 90% of all interchangeable lens camera owners have never MFA'd a lens, nor even know what MFA is. . MFA is not an activity for the masses - it's really only that something that the extremely rare photo geeks and forum types even know about, and this demographic is an extremely small proportion of the entire interchangeable lens camera market.

.

^^^
No lens I've used needed any MFA.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,583 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4994
Joined May 2002
Location: Cannelton
Post edited 5 months ago by TeamSpeed.
     
Oct 15, 2018 18:26 |  #1868

Run a huge mix of lenses through any body, and you will find at least one that needs MFA to get the most out of it. When somebody says, none of my stuff needs MFA, that means they haven't really done any testing with their lenses to see how they perform in a very controlled environment to see what they do consistently well, or poorly, or they shoot in such a way DOF is rarely so narrow that something misfocusing would really be noticed.

I run a mix of old and new Sigma lenses, Canon lenses, and Tokina lenses across a myriad of bodies. In some cases, I would need hardly anything, but there have been lenses that consistently have focus somewhere in front of the test object each time I took a test shot. Running MFA numbers of around 5-8 almost always would fix those lenses.

Now why would this matter? With a long lens shooting close up, you end up with a DOF that is actually a bit thin, and any misfocused combination of body + lens is very noticeable. Run a longer distance, and the DOF increases and thus hides some of these issues. I will often run my long lenses near MFD, and this is where MFA helps.

Shoot portraiture with a wider fast lens, and you will sometimes see a lens constantly be just enough OOF that the eyes are never in focus despite using Spot AF and focusing on the eyes. I have seen this when as well when shooting those creative shots for weddings like ring shots, etc and you don't want to go home to find out your subject material is just slightly OOF.

Mirrorless will do away with much of this fortunately. Also, as I await the M50 to arrive, the size of the EFM lenses are quite astounding. The 55-250 on the adapter is huge compared to the 55-200 EFM. The 50 1.2 is a tiny little lens, and I cannot wait to use that. I have sold the SL2 in the the hopes the M50 will be a better macro camera, plus I can use some of the very good samyang glass now with MF. Now I just await the pro version of the EOS-R so I can have a FF sports monster!


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,627 posts
Likes: 496
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Oct 15, 2018 21:05 |  #1869

Some interesting 2 topics being discussed now. 1.) RAID memory cards. IMO, won't show up on cameras since current dual cards can be set for redundancy or alternative recording with just a couple taps on your customized menu. There's always been a need for RAID with servers, and with cost and technology, that has filtered down to home network drives. While you can have your camera tethered to a RAID computer, I don't think camera brands are racing for RAID dual memory slots.

2.) The more I've experimented, the more I've found MFA can be very subtle. It's YMMV: Where you have the shallowest DOF is where there will be the most apparent area of focus (and it may be critical). I try to MFA all my lenses when I get a new camera. With my 5D4, I have some lenses that looked fine at 0, one at -2, and others going up to +3. Most my situations, now, though has me stopping down aperture for my portraits...and DOF is easily going from tip of nose to back of ear (with enough distance in back for OOF). I've gotten in the workflow to have all keepers. Before, there was also some user error as to focus not being on the eye (and OOF was very apparent with wide aperture and I'm in a tight space). Looking at those photos, it also confirmed to me about how focus/recompose may not be within focus tolerance.


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mdvaden
Goldmember
Avatar
2,897 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 1043
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
     
Oct 15, 2018 21:25 |  #1870

Shared this yesterday in the EOS photo sharing thread. A few minutes are slow, but there are a broad variety of image samples from several lenses, taken with the EOS R. This type of feedback may speak more clearly to the average photographer on the street than something like Northrup's lab style.


vadenphotography.com (external link) . . . and . . . Coast Redwoods Main Page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
patrick ­ j
Goldmember
1,246 posts
Gallery: 29 photos
Likes: 1583
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Denver
     
Oct 15, 2018 23:32 |  #1871

mcoren wrote in post #18729689 (external link)
I think what's confusing me is that I thought the point at which the rays of light converge *is* the focal point, and AF is trying to place that right on the image sensor surface. Maybe that's where I'm mistaken, because I believe there's also a point where the rays converge inside the lens (where the aperture stop is located).

This really has nothing to do with MFA, but it does have something to do with focusing and converging. He highlighted a feature that looked pretty cool when I saw it in a Canon promo video, but haven't seen it talked about very much. I started the video at just about where he starts talking about a manual focus option.

https://youtu.be/hLM_u​GPGQLA?t=238 (external link)


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,402 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 460
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Oct 16, 2018 03:44 |  #1872

mcoren wrote in post #18729689 (external link)
I think what's confusing me is that I thought the point at which the rays of light converge *is* the focal point, and AF is trying to place that right on the image sensor surface. Maybe that's where I'm mistaken, because I believe there's also a point where the rays converge inside the lens (where the aperture stop is located).

On a DSLR (using phase AF through the viewfinder) the AF is trying to place the convergence right on the AF sensor surface; and that's where the problem lies.

Any component - be it physical or electrical - will have an acceptable range of tolerances for the application (e.g. a resistor that will be a certain value, +/- 5%). The sum of all those components means that any part (lens or body) may individually be within a tolerance the manufacturer deems acceptable, but together the error may mean the difference between the path from the lens and the body's AF sensor, and the path from the lens and the imaging sensor, may just be "out" sufficiently that what's in focus on the AF sensor plane is not in focus on the image sensor plane. Alternatively - a sample of a lens and a body may both individually be right at the limit of acceptable tolerance - but in opposite directions; hence together they work well. Luck of the draw.

Where rays converge inside the lens' elements is separate to the interaction between the body and lens. Any issues that are purely internal to the lens (such as misalignment of the glass elements) won't be fixed by a mirrorless camera.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,402 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 460
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Oct 16, 2018 03:49 |  #1873

John Sheehy wrote in post #18729420 (external link)
The full benefit requires bigger lenses, with shallower DOF, for the same FOV. That is often forgotten.

Yep, true - though I was mostly thinking of the improved noise character and better dynamic range.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18729622 (external link)
Murphy's Law: Guess what would be the first thing to fail?
Of course, that fancy RAID controller chip :)

Murphy is an assh*le ;-)a

(though to be fair, a lot of the early reliability problems of SSDs were down to the internal controllers - rather than specifically the flash memory. These days reliability seems pretty good)


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
10,523 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 2312
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
     
Oct 17, 2018 10:29 |  #1874

After constant research since this release i must say I have changed my opinions about some things that the testers have brought forward to everyone attention

1- It appears that its going to be a non issue with using existing L glass on this new body- Thats Huge for canon shoters

2- It appears that Mico adjust is a thing of the past on the new body. I have seen zero reports about focus targets not being 100% sharp and the ones that had misses attributed the miss to pilot error. This is going to be a huge reason fir many to make the switch.

3- The new R glass is going to be far superior to existing L glass and its captain obvious they will be releasing stuff we have only dreamed about. The 28-70 F/2 speaks for itself. I think we are on for a treat from Canon with future lens releases

4- It appears to me that the eye focus that is Sony's bread and butter selling point is something Canon is not to excited about. They are going to put the technology to facial recognition. This is going to be apples v/s oranges to me. The videos I have seen have all been blown away with facial recognition capabilities. Whats the difference ? eyes v/s facial recognition. Not a big deal in my opinion. This last video....300 shots and 2 misses with facial recognition. And he states pilot error on the missed shots....This is huge in my opinion

So I hope Canon comes out with a new release quickly and it is aimed at the professional market with a camera that has dual cards.

Had this camera had dual cards I would have it in my bag right now with the new 24-105 R lens. I am very impressed with everything I have seen. This was a huge mistake to release w/o dual cards. Wedding and event photographers wont buy w/o dual cards.

I have one last question to be resolved and that has to do with teleconverters and how its going to behave with TC's. With the focus capabilities and micro adjust not being a factor, I am hopeful that 1.4 and especially 2.0 TC's will not be affected by some of the image loss concerns that we see. Especially with 2.0 Tc's......we could be in for a real treat here

If anyone has information about TC use.......Please post

Tom Im sure you have questions with TC's as well


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,402 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 460
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Oct 17, 2018 10:47 |  #1875

umphotography wrote in post #18730755 (external link)
After constant research since this release i must say I have changed my opinions about some things that the testers have brought forward to everyone attention

1- It appears that its going to be a non issue with using existing L glass on this new body- Thats Huge for canon shoters

2- It appears that Mico adjust is a thing of the past on the new body. I have seen zero reports about focus targets not being 100% sharp and the ones that had misses attributed the miss to pilot error. This is going to be a huge reason fir many to make the switch.

3- The new R glass is going to be far superior to existing L glass and its captain obvious they will be releasing stuff we have only dreamed about. The 28-70 F/2 speaks for itself. I think we are on for a treat from Canon with future lens releases

4- It appears to me that the eye focus that is Sony's bread and butter selling point is something Canon is not to excited about. They are going to put the technology to facial recognition. This is going to be apples v/s oranges to me. The videos I have seen have all been blown away with facial recognition capabilities. Whats the difference ? eyes v/s facial recognition. Not a big deal in my opinion. This last video....300 shots and 2 misses with facial recognition. And he states pilot error on the missed shots....This is huge in my opinion

So I hope Canon comes out with a new release quickly and it is aimed at the professional market with a camera that has dual cards.

Had this camera had dual cards I would have it in my bag right now with the new 24-105 R lens. I am very impressed with everything I have seen. This was a huge mistake to release w/o dual cards. Wedding and event photographers wont buy w/o dual cards.

I have one last question to be resolved and that has to do with teleconverters and how its going to behave with TC's. With the focus capabilities and micro adjust not being a factor, I am hopeful that 1.4 and especially 2.0 TC's will not be affected by some of the image loss concerns that we see. Especially with 2.0 Tc's......we could be in for a real treat here

If anyone has information about TC use.......Please post

Tom Im sure you have questions with TC's as well

There's an interview with Sigma's CEO on the DPReview site, and he specifically mentions admiration for Canon's new R lenses; his point being that the short registration distance allows for designs that wouldn't otherwise be possible. As such. I assume your optimism that we'll see some interesting steps forward in glass seems well founded.

For TCs; Canon's UK CPS site was claiming complete compatibility. You'll certainly still get some image quality loss (waiting for John S to correct my terminology); as the TC is magnifying a smaller portion of the lens, but there should be no issues of MFA shifts with a TC as MFA is irrelevant when doing AF on-sensor.

AF speed with a TC may well be slower. Saying "because of the reduced aperture size" is the wrong term, but I can't think of the right one just now (angles of light... basically) - but, essentially, it's harder to do phase AF with a TC. How the R compares with/without a TC (in terms of AF speed) vs the 1Dx2 and 5D4 I don't know.


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)

115,680 views & 1,660 likes for this thread
EOS-R - It's out. Thoughts?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
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 notinspired
832 guests, 287 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.