Should I send my 24-70mm to Canon before exp?

I recently sent my 7D in because my flash wouldn't pop up and I also asked them to check for camera for any adjustments because I've noticed my pictures were very soft. (Just told them that since I was sending it in anyway and my warranty was about to expire.) Well, it did need an adjustment. They also cleaned my sensor as well as updating the firmware.

Anyway,
After testing my 70-200mm using the new Focal Software (Which needed to be MA +11), I tested my 24-70mm over the weekend and after numerous tests, it needed to be micro adjusted +17! Even thought I barely use the 24-70mm, my warranty is going to expire in March, so I figured now would be the best time to send it in to see if it needed to be calibrated. I'll try to take some test shots on a tripod and see what you guys think. But regardless, I think if one has to MA a lens that much, something is definitely not right with it.

Am I putting way to much thought into this and over reacting over a micro adjustment #? (Yes, I'm one anal SOB)

Thanks,


Christian

Buylongterm wrote in post #13756294
I recently sent my 7D in because my flash wouldn't pop up and I also asked them to check for camera for any adjustments because I've noticed my pictures were very soft. (Just told them that since I was sending it in anyway and my warranty was about to expire.) Well, it did need an adjustment. They also cleaned my sensor as well as updating the firmware.

Anyway,
After testing my 70-200mm using the new Focal Software (Which needed to be MA +11), I tested my 24-70mm over the weekend and after numerous tests, it needed to be micro adjusted +17! Even thought I barely use the 24-70mm, my warranty is going to expire in March, so I figured now would be the best time to send it in to see if it needed to be calibrated. I'll try to take some test shots on a tripod and see what you guys think. But regardless, I think if one has to MA a lens that much, something is definitely not right with it.

Am I putting way to much thought into this and over reacting over a micro adjustment #? (Yes, I'm one anal SOB)

Thanks,

Christian

send it. you'll never forgive yourself if you don't .

ed rader

ed rader wrote in post #13756330
send it. you'll never forgive yourself if you don't .

ed rader

Very good point. But in your opinion, is a +17 MA seem high for a lens that I have barely used?

Buylongterm wrote in post #13756387
Very good point. But in your opinion, is a +17 MA seem high for a lens that I have barely used?

seems high. which end of the zoom are you adjusting?

ed rader

ed rader wrote in post #13756394
seems high. which end of the zoom are you adjusting?

ed rader

70mm @ 50x Focal length ( a little over 11 ft. away)

Let me get this straight... You sent in your 7D and they "adjusted" it... Now one of your lenses needs +11 and the other needs +17 MA... I'm thinking I'd be sending the camera back to be adjusted again. They might have made it worse when they adjusted it!

Send the camera and the lenses together, with examples and notes that you are having to use a lot of micro adjust to dial them in... at least it seems excessive to me.

amfoto1 wrote in post #13756680
Let me get this straight... You sent in your 7D and they "adjusted" it... Now one of your lenses needs +11 and the other needs +17 MA... I'm thinking I'd be sending the camera back to be adjusted again. They might have made it worse when they adjusted it!

Send the camera and the lenses together, with examples and notes that you are having to use a lot of micro adjust to dial them in... at least it seems excessive to me.

Very good point....

Buylongterm wrote in post #13756294
I recently sent my 7D in because my flash wouldn't pop up and I also asked them to check for camera for any adjustments because I've noticed my pictures were very soft. (Just told them that since I was sending it in anyway and my warranty was about to expire.) Well, it did need an adjustment. They also cleaned my sensor as well as updating the firmware.

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

Anyway,
After testing my 70-200mm using the new Focal Software (Which needed to be MA +11), I tested my 24-70mm over the weekend and after numerous tests, it needed to be micro adjusted +17! Even thought I barely use the 24-70mm, my warranty is going to expire in March, so I figured now would be the best time to send it in to see if it needed to be calibrated. I'll try to take some test shots on a tripod and see what you guys think. But regardless, I think if one has to MA a lens that much, something is definitely not right with it.

Am I putting way to much thought into this and over reacting over a micro adjustment #? (Yes, I'm one anal SOB)

Thanks,


Christian

I think you should just for the sake of it.
You never know what problems they find

send both in, something isn't right - let Canon sort it out.

Tested my 100 L and it came back with a 0. Phew!

What I'm trying to figure is what MA range would be considered tolerable/justified by members or Canon when deciding to send the lens in for calibration. Anything over or under + or - 10??

Without proper testing or software, can one really tell the difference between a ma of +2 or +3 vs leaving it at zero? I read thousands of threads on here about soft pictures and members sending their lenses to Canon or exchanging them for a new one. Since a lot people are just going off pictures which are noticable, im curious where the ma ranges begin for us to see those type of results. Basically at what point can we safely assume the lens is in need of a calibration (taking into consideration the camera is fine)

Does that make sense?

For example (just making it up)

-5 - +5. Not noticable but within the norm
-10 +10 very noticable, but..........????
Anything over or under 10 is not acceptable and should be sent in???

I really wanna be able to grasp this concept before I drive myself crazy.

I can't say what is too big a number, but certainly at 15 or more I get a little anxious: there's not much room for further correction if things change over time.

With a zoom I think it's informative to at least check both extremes. You'll always see a little difference between the long and short end, maybe +/- 5 or so. But when a zoom begins to fail (particularly the 24-70), you can see this difference get really large. I wouldn't be concerned about the OP's +11 at the 70mm end, but if the 24mm end required -5 or +20, I'd be concerned the zoom barrel was out of alignment:
http://www.lensrentals​.com …0/the-limits-of-variation (scroll down to "the 24-70 mystery").

I tired 3 times and still get +10 after a factory calibration lens + body. I guess it's within spec for them.

^^^^
Interesting.

Buylongterm wrote in post #13757969
What I'm trying to figure is what MA range would be considered tolerable/justified by members or Canon when deciding to send the lens in for calibration. Anything over or under + or - 10??

If it is possible to correct AF performance by MA, then there is no need to send anything in for calibration. That is what MA is for and it's working perfectly.

That's the way I see it anyway, but then my 30D doesn't sport MA at all, and I cope.

I just realized I never updated this post. I never fully read the instructions about what the EV levels should be. So After doing some more tests in proper lighting conditions outdoors,
And two software updates from Focal, my 24-70 came back at a plus +4 And the 70-200 I settled on a +7.