Reikan FoCal M/A software test on 7D

So here are some of my results with my 7D and my 70-200mm 2.8 IS II. I apologize in advance. The tests are inconsistent. I should of tested both focal ranges for each test. didn't realize this till the end and by then I was freezing my ass off.

All tests and pics were done at 50x max focal length (just used a electric box on the side of the house which had #'s on it)

Shots:
MA=0 @ 70mm

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Test 2.
Left MA @ +10
error message:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Test 3.
MA= +11
results:
MA +11 (no change)

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Buylongterm wrote in post #13677638
So here are some of my results with my 7D and my 70-200mm 2.8 IS II. I apologize in advance. The tests are inconsistent. I should of tested both focal ranges for each test. didn't realize this till the end and by then I was freezing my ass off.

All tests and pics were done at 50x max focal length (just used a electric box on the side of the house which had #'s on it)

Shots:
MA @ 0
200mm

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

MA @ 0 (cropped)

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Test 1.
MA=0
results:MA +10

200mm

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

200mm (cropped)

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Is this micro adjust software available for the Canon 17-55mm lens? Is it recommended to use this software for your lens?

Out of curiosity, why didn't you use the focus test charts that are included with the software?

StructuredAmazing wrote in post #13677741
Is this micro adjust software available for the Canon 17-55mm lens? Is it recommended to use this software for your lens?

From everything I've read, people are getting fantastic results. The software is only compatible with the 5D and 7D at the moment. Being fairly new to all this, the software is extremely user friendly. It works with all lenses on either camera.

MATT0404 wrote in post #13677837
Out of curiosity, why didn't you use the focus test charts that are included with the software?

I did. The pics above are just shots after doing the tests using the chart that comes with the software. If you look at my pics with the software, the rings are from the printout.

Buylongterm wrote in post #13677851
I did. The pics above are just shots after doing the tests using the chart that comes with the software. If you look at my pics with the software, the rings are from the printout.

Ahhh, ok. I'm using the software, too, and can't say that I've had consistent results.

On my 100-400L it recommended a setting of +5 at 400mm and -11 at 100mm. Confused, I tried the test again during the day in much better lighting. This seemed to help, as it recommended -2 for both 100 and 400mm.

MATT0404 wrote in post #13677913
Ahhh, ok. I'm using the software, too, and can't say that I've had consistent results.

On my 100-400L it recommended a setting of +5 at 400mm and -11 at 100mm. Confused, I tried the test again during the day in much better lighting. This seemed to help, as it recommended -2 for both 100 and 400mm.

My tests pretty much showed the same thing. Nothing to consistent. But it definitely helped me realize that my lens definitely needs to be MA. Deciding what setting I'm going to use will be the hard part. Going to run more tests before the temp drops back into the low 20's

However my real question is if my lens needs that big of an adjustment, shouldn't it go back to canon for calibration???

I did my first runs a week ago using the default settings, being reasonably careful with the whole setup and got good and consistent results.

Yesterday I started through all my lenses and bodies again using the strictest settings, which required better lighting, perfect target alignment, rock-solid tripod/head stability. Basically I set everything up like a transit on a construction site. Stretched a string perpendicular to the target 15 meters long to keep the tripod aligned at each distance. This all tightened the results, some staying the same, some deciding a point or two better than the first run.

The results reflect what you put into it and once you've gotten it down, I think you will get very precise and consistent results, or get shown that you gear is not as precise and consistent as you thought it was.

I found that Poor AF Performance warning to be primarily due to imperfect target alignment, meaning you get the green check in the Fit view, but a red X in the Zoom view. I found this to be particularly touchy with the 85L because of the ultra thin DOF. Conversely the 50 f/1.4 was touchy as hell cause its AF mechanics are erratic as hell.

If you get the Poor AF Performance warning you can try to refine alignment or stabilize your platform, but you can also click Yes to continue and you may still get a good result.

Doing this outdoors, if you've got some wind, may not be a good idea.

^^^^
Great points and great advise! Im going to try the tests again. Problem is I'll have to wait for the weekend and by then it will be cold and windy.

If you've got 10 meters and good lights inside, why not do it inside?

John_T wrote in post #13679993
If you've got 10 meters and good lights inside, why not do it inside?

Because I don't have 10meters and I don't have good light inside.

So, I did some comparing, and from my initial tests, MA +8 looks much better than than leaving it at MA 0 (see images)

200mm cropped (no Micro Adjustment)

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

...eeeYup.