7D Mark II - Focus Discussions

huntersdad wrote in post #17469566
Rod that is interesting. Guess it could be the reset. I have all the same settings you have with the exception of 2: Live View off (which I actually assume means you weren't in LV) and Case 2. The interesting part is that Case 2 is where I struggled so much in testing the camera that I have gone away from it. However, it is the case I use with my 1Dx with outstanding results.

Glad it seems to be working.

As I said the pictures are quite acceptable. They are not really sharp but at this time I am looking for consistancy. I did a couple of casual portrait shots of a coworker. They were taken at about 6 or 7 feet mat 70mm with F6.3. The eyes are not sharp the knit cap he is wearing shows good detail as does the few hairs on his chin. I have to check focus point placement and get an idea of the depth of field when the shot was taken. Most of the other shots were of flat subjects so analyzing is harder. The camera is very close. I doubt canon will do anything with it unless I can provide concrete proof of a problem. Gonna take it slow and easy.

The article I read on MFA referred to depth of field and not depth of focus hence the need for using the lens wide open. If he is right and your depth of field is say, one inch and each tick is 1/8 of that then...Maybe I can translate the numbers to distance to calculate required MFA adjustment. I know my 70-300L back focuses a little at 70.

Rod

RodS57 wrote in post #17470270
As I said the pictures are quite acceptable. They are not really sharp but at this time I am looking for consistancy. I did a couple of casual portrait shots of a coworker. They were taken at about 6 or 7 feet mat 70mm with F6.3. The eyes are not sharp the knit cap he is wearing shows good detail as does the few hairs on his chin. I have to check focus point placement and get an idea of the depth of field when the shot was taken. Most of the other shots were of flat subjects so analyzing is harder. The camera is very close. I doubt canon will do anything with it unless I can provide concrete proof of a problem. Gonna take it slow and easy.

The article I read on MFA referred to depth of field and not depth of focus hence the need for using the lens wide open. If he is right and your depth of field is say, one inch and each tick is 1/8 of that then...Maybe I can translate the numbers to distance to calculate required MFA adjustment. I know my 70-300L back focuses a little at 70.

Rod

1/8th is the number being kicked around. Not sure if it 1/8th of the DOF or 1/8th of an inch.

I'm sure you know this, but the 7d2 can be focus adjusted for both ends of a telephoto lens.

huntersdad wrote in post #17470379
1/8th is the number being kicked around. Not sure if it 1/8th of the DOF or 1/8th of an inch.

Per Bryan Carnathan, "One unit of AFMA equates to 1/8 of the depth of focus of a given lens’ maximum aperture."

huntersdad wrote in post #17470379
1/8th is the number being kicked around. Not sure if it 1/8th of the DOF or 1/8th of an inch.

I'm sure you know this, but the 7d2 can be focus adjusted for both ends of a telephoto lens.

it is 1/8 DOF. However, there was ambiguity whether it was 1/8 of the whole DOF or for each side (front / back of focus plane). So it is either 1/8 total DOF or 1/16 per click.

gschlact wrote in post #17470511
it is 1/8 DOF. However, there was ambiguity whether it was 1/8 of the whole DOF or for each side (front / back of focus plane). So it is either 1/8 total DOF or 1/16 per click.

Ticks
Explains my problems getting sharp focus set up. Like a metronome first it looks like I have to go one way then next shot I have to go the other way.

May as well try to inject some humor in all of this.

Rod

gschlact wrote in post #17470511
it is 1/8 DOF. However, there was ambiguity whether it was 1/8 of the whole DOF or for each side (front / back of focus plane). So it is either 1/8 total DOF or 1/16 per click.

That is not the only ambiguity. Everybody calculates DOF differently. Assumptions differ for the circle of confusion, the focal length changes with subject distance, and the exit pupil is not the expected size. All of these parameters affect calculations for DOF.

So what we are left with is that 8 units of MFA is a small but significant adjustment.

Archibald wrote in post #17470651
That is not the only ambiguity. Everybody calculates DOF differently. Assumptions differ for the circle of confusion, the focal length changes with subject distance, and the exit pupil is not the expected size. All of these parameters affect calculations for DOF.

So what we are left with is that 8 units of MFA is a small but significant adjustment.

What so you mean "assumptions differ for the circle of confusion?" The CoC is sensor specific as far as I learned. . Of course Dof is distance and FL dependent. The "clicks" of mfa are in units of fractional dof for the given image setup. One can then convert to distance if they know the other values.

gschlact wrote in post #17470190
I asked the exact same questions. His Chuck's answer did not indicate any reason to think there were further differences between the cases besides the user adjusted parameter values for a given camera. I'll ask him to review your post / exchange. It would benefit the community to reconcile the different Canon responses. As customers, we certainly can't.

OK, this can be put to bed. Two birds with one stone in one single place on the net.

I got another email response. Ask from Chuck Westfall with concurrence and Rudy Winston copied. I thanked them both for their extra communication efforts on behalf of the Canon Customer Community. His response is below, with today's note below it where I pasted the whole Methodical/Rudy exchange from last month.

From: Chuck Westfall
Sent: March 11, 2015 4:53:41 PM CDT
To: Guy Schlacter
Cc: Rudy
Subject: Re: -2- RE: Please help clarify

Guy,

I have discussed this with Rudy Winston and we both concur that Cases 1 through 6 on the AF Configuration Tool are simply different combinations of the same settings for Tracking Sensitivity, Acceleration/Decelerat​ion Tracking, and AF Point Auto Switching. For example, a Tracking Sensitivity setting of "0" is exactly the same no matter which Case the user selects. We base this conclusion not only on what we've been told by the R&D engineers from Canon Inc. but also on our own personal experiences working with the equipment in the field.

In answer to the AF Microadjustment question, the focus shift amount per step (click, tick) is calculated by multiplying the maximum aperture's single-side depth of focus by 1/8. The key phrase is "single-side depth of focus." It equates to half of the total depth of focus, which of course extends equally both in front of and behind the focal plane. Note also that the calculation is based on depth of focus, which is measured at the focal plane and is always equally distributed in front of an behind it, and not depth of field, which is measured at the subject and does not always extend equally in front of or behind it. Note further that the depth of focus is proportional to the focal length and the maximum aperture of the lens; therefore, the larger the maximum aperture and the longer the focal length, the smaller each individual AF Microadjustment step becomes.

Best Regards,
Canon U.S.A., Inc. Chuck Westfall
Advisor, Strategic Research & Development
Future Product & Solution Plan Division
Canon U.S.A., Inc.
One Canon Park, Melville, NY 11747
www.usa.canon.com

From: "Guy Schlacter"
To: <Chuck Westfall>, <Rudy Winston >
Cc: >
Date: 03/11/2015 03:28 PM
Subject: -2- RE: Please help clarify

Chuck,
Sorry to bother you again.
I summarized your response, and there are people that have furnished info from Canon (Rudy Winston Canon Pro Products and CPS) that is contradictory to yours. I am hoping you can please address this so as to reconcile the discrepancy and the 7D ii customer community can be confident in our understanding. Below is the brief email conversation with Rudy and the Canon Customer.

I had understood your response from Monday to mean: the Case numbers in the AF Configuration Tool are simply a convenient preset of the 3 case user-parameter values fed to a common underlying algorithm. The different Cases (numbers) simply represent a different combination of user-setting values!" There are no underlying non-user parameters or algorithm differences distinguishing Case 1-N from each other when the user-parameter values are identical for different Case numbers.

Please read it and weigh in.

First, one unrelated quick question. It has been said that for the Micro Focus Adjust settings, each click is 1/8 DOF. However, there was ambiguity whether it was 1/8 of the whole DOF or 1/8 per click for the front DOF or back DOF from the focus plane which would translate into 1/16 total DOF per click. Can you tell us which it is?

Back to the AI Servo III Cases –
From POTN post 2129.

This is the Email Conversation question and answer from one of the members here to Rudy Winston

Methodical21 month ago (edited)

"Rudy, Question. Hopefully you are reading this. Does anything else distinguish the six AF cases from each other, besides the three adjustable tracking parameter settings under each Case?

In other words, if I manually adjusted the three parameters under Case 1 to have the exact same values as the default settings under Case 6, would Cases 1 and 6 then perform exactly the same? Or would there still be some behavioral difference between the two, governed by internal parameters that are not adjustable by the user? Basically, are the 6 cases just 6 different presets for different action type shots to make things easier for some shooters or does each AF case function differently via some special AF algorithm? This question has surfaced on several forums and there are many interpretations.

Thanks

Reply CanonUSA 1 month ago

Hi Methodical2,
Great question. The AF Case do have built-in parameters that are not user modifiable. As an example, Case 1 might jump to a subject that appears suddenly in the image and crosses and active AF point, Case 2 will try to ignore it. Case 3 will try to lock on and track a new subject that appears in front of the first target. These differences are explained in the EOS 7D Mark II AF-Setting Guidebook at http://downloads.canon​.com ..._AF_guide_CUSA_9-2014.pdf and in the full Instruction Manual. We hope you find this helpful.

Reply · Methodical2 1 month ago (edited)
+CanonUSA
Just to be clear. If I adjust Case 1 to the same settings as say Case 3 there are still non user modifiable AF algorithm going on behind the scene that makes the two AF cases different no matter the settings? Is this correct?

Thanks

Reply CanonUSA 1 month ago
Hello Methodical2,
That is correct, there are background settings in each case that cannot be modified. We hope this helps.

Reply Methodical2 1 month ago
+CanonUSA
Yes that helps tremendously


Thank you.
Respecfully,
Guy

I previously mentioned that I used the 'clear all settings' button to try and clear any errors in settings that I changed which may be contributing to my focus issues. In both cases the pictures are heavily cropped and then resized so they may not display the necessary detail. Both are taken with the 70-300L at 70mm. Because of the difference in settings this is not an apples to apples comparison.

The shot of the cereal boxes taken at ISO 100, F4, 1/2000 sec, approximate distance 10 feet and before camera reset. Boxes are set up with a 2 inch horzontal offset with left box closest and right box farthest away. None are in focus. I had direct sunlight diffused by light cloud cover.

The second shot in 'M' mode ISO 2000, F6.3, 1/1250 sec, approximate distance 6-7 feet and after camera reset. Taken roughly 30 minutes before sunset with cloud cover. The actual shot seems to be a contradiction in itself. The part of the coat pictured is good, the knit hat is good, the face ok and the eyes not sharp but they were also in a shadow. I know ISO 2000 did not help.

Rod

I have been researching a lack of focus on my new Canon 7D Mark II since Monday, and this group seems the most likely to give me candid, but kind, feedback. So, here I am – please go easy on me.

My trusty Canon 50D has served me well over the years, but when I started taking indoor sports shots of my kids I found that it fell considerably short. I primarily shoot sports (indoor and out), families, kids, dogs, everyday life kind of things. I did my research and decided to upgrade to the 7DM2 based on the glowing focus recommendations, the low light indoor sports capability, and all those focus points! (I briefly considered the 5DM2, but concluded that it might be too much camera for me at this point. Plus, I preferred to stick with the crop sensor for the extra reach for sports. And I didn’t want to spend that much $$! ) I knew jumping from the 50D to the 7DM2 was going to have a steep learning curve, so I grabbed an ebook and skimmed it while I eagerly awaited delivery.

On Monday, it arrived, and I quickly started taking pics. I am sorely disappointed; all of the images appear soft to me. I hit upon this thread and have read all 143 pages (ack!). Since Monday, my images have improved, which leads me to believe the problem is with the operator not the equipment, but they are not nearly as crisp as I would like them to be. And they are not nearly as sharp as the images I see on the web from this same model/lens combo.

My go-to lens is the EF70-200mm f2.8L IS II USM. I have also tried my old EF 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS lens, with equally soft shots. I also have the 50mm 1.8, but as the focus on that lens is hit or miss for me anyway, I have not tried it yet on the 7DM2.

I have assembled a group of shots that I would love some feedback on – are they soft or am I being too critical? Here’s the link: http://1drv.ms/1Ak6Hwq

The Civil War shots were taken as jpgs because I wanted to test to see if it was RAW/unsharpened/unproc​essed pics that was causing my disappointment. IS was off on my lens during these shots because I forgot to turn it off after my tripod focus tests earlier in the day.

Here’s my breakdown of the issues with the Civil War pics:
562 – I think is probably the best of the bunch. I just feel it could be a bit sharper since it was @ 1/1600th and the subject wasn’t moving.
595 – also not too bad, I just expect ultra sharp.
611 – focus point is on the guy in the center with his head turned. But it seems like the photo’s sharpest focus is on the gun barrel pointing at me.
615 – focus point on the redheads face, but her gun barrel is sharpest.
629 – again on the redhead, but just not as sharp as I was expecting.
649 – again, just not perfectly clear
669 – the worst of the bunch IMO, focus was squarely on the boy in the center. He wasn’t running around or anything, so I would have thought that 1/640th would have been enough.

Football: I won’t go through each one, but my focus point is typically on someone’s face. They look blurry when viewed at 100%. Perhaps, that’s the issue? Everything looks flawed at 100%??

I do want to point two out – Little Boy Blue (#698). I was focused on his face, but the grass in the foreground appears sharper. And # 708 – I was focused on the boy on the right’s face, but his jersey seems to be sharper. This seems to be a theme across all of my pics, which is why I did a focus test yesterday to see if I needed to go the microfocus adjustment route. (The focus test shots didn’t seem to be particularly sharp viewed at 100%, but didn’t seem to indicate a front focusing issue either.)

What do you think, is the focus as it should be? If so, I think post processing sharpening is going to be my new best friend.

Thanks in advance!
PS Hmm, I just looked back at some of my 50D shots that I thought were well focused, and they don’t look good at 100% either, so maybe that’s it.

Wick,

Here's my thoughts:

562, 595 are fine.

611 - The AF point is larger than what you see in the viewfinder and I think, in this one, the camera picked up the barrel which was closer to it.

615 - I think this is OK, but lack of light on her face vs. light on the barrel is making the difference.

629, 649 - Again, I think these are fine.

669 - Got nothing for you on this one unless, you maybe used the wrong point accidently or locked on the kid to the left and switched over quickly but the camera didn't have time to make the switch.

First word of wisdom is quit looking at them at 100%. If you wanted to do that, you should have bought the 5d2/3. Stay around 50%.

Sharpening and masking will be your friend. So will light.

They all look fine to me, no problems with the camera on these photos.

Canon-Chas wrote in post #17473487
They all look fine to me, no problems with the camera on these photos.

I'm with this; I'd have been happy with those (perhaps my standards and skills are too low, but so be it). The football ones look underexposed, if anything, but not soft.

WickGold wrote in post #17473387
I have been researching a lack of focus on my new Canon 7D Mark II since Monday, and this group seems the most likely to give me candid, but kind, feedback. So, here I am – please go easy on me.

My trusty Canon 50D has served me well over the years, but when I started taking indoor sports shots of my kids I found that it fell considerably short. I primarily shoot sports (indoor and out), families, kids, dogs, everyday life kind of things. I did my research and decided to upgrade to the 7DM2 based on the glowing focus recommendations, the low light indoor sports capability, and all those focus points! (I briefly considered the 5DM2, but concluded that it might be too much camera for me at this point. Plus, I preferred to stick with the crop sensor for the extra reach for sports. And I didn’t want to spend that much $$! ) I knew jumping from the 50D to the 7DM2 was going to have a steep learning curve, so I grabbed an ebook and skimmed it while I eagerly awaited delivery.

On Monday, it arrived, and I quickly started taking pics. I am sorely disappointed; all of the images appear soft to me. I hit upon this thread and have read all 143 pages (ack!). Since Monday, my images have improved, which leads me to believe the problem is with the operator not the equipment, but they are not nearly as crisp as I would like them to be. And they are not nearly as sharp as the images I see on the web from this same model/lens combo.

My go-to lens is the EF70-200mm f2.8L IS II USM. I have also tried my old EF 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS lens, with equally soft shots. I also have the 50mm 1.8, but as the focus on that lens is hit or miss for me anyway, I have not tried it yet on the 7DM2.

I have assembled a group of shots that I would love some feedback on – are they soft or am I being too critical? Here’s the link: http://1drv.ms/1Ak6Hwq

The Civil War shots were taken as jpgs because I wanted to test to see if it was RAW/unsharpened/unproc​essed pics that was causing my disappointment. IS was off on my lens during these shots because I forgot to turn it off after my tripod focus tests earlier in the day.

Here’s my breakdown of the issues with the Civil War pics:
562 – I think is probably the best of the bunch. I just feel it could be a bit sharper since it was @ 1/1600th and the subject wasn’t moving.
595 – also not too bad, I just expect ultra sharp.
611 – focus point is on the guy in the center with his head turned. But it seems like the photo’s sharpest focus is on the gun barrel pointing at me.
615 – focus point on the redheads face, but her gun barrel is sharpest.
629 – again on the redhead, but just not as sharp as I was expecting.
649 – again, just not perfectly clear
669 – the worst of the bunch IMO, focus was squarely on the boy in the center. He wasn’t running around or anything, so I would have thought that 1/640th would have been enough.

Football: I won’t go through each one, but my focus point is typically on someone’s face. They look blurry when viewed at 100%. Perhaps, that’s the issue? Everything looks flawed at 100%??

I do want to point two out – Little Boy Blue (#698). I was focused on his face, but the grass in the foreground appears sharper. And # 708 – I was focused on the boy on the right’s face, but his jersey seems to be sharper. This seems to be a theme across all of my pics, which is why I did a focus test yesterday to see if I needed to go the microfocus adjustment route. (The focus test shots didn’t seem to be particularly sharp viewed at 100%, but didn’t seem to indicate a front focusing issue either.)

What do you think, is the focus as it should be? If so, I think post processing sharpening is going to be my new best friend.

Thanks in advance!
PS Hmm, I just looked back at some of my 50D shots that I thought were well focused, and they don’t look good at 100% either, so maybe that’s it.

Ginger,
I saw you are getting some positive votes of confidence. I'll add to it and hope you find the following info useful. I give you huge kudos for reading this while thread and trying to self assess.

I analyzed the first shot 137. To me, the I age is I. Sharpest focus for the middle boys 2nd from top button forward to about the gun in front of the middle boys left shoulder. I am on tablet so I don't know where you placed the focus point? I will assume for now it was on his chest near black strap and second button. Because this image had all the pixels (no crop), I estimated about 3ft (max) field of view top to bottom and therefore at 200mm and f4, you have 0.79ft dof. (just under 10inches). I do believe you have some front focus and based on this image and your comments, I would try to shift the focal plane about 5" back. This would be about +8 ticks or units of mfa. Why hasn't would be about 5 inches.

I also looked at image 595, my guess is that you focused on the center boy's chest who is perfect. Look at the stitching of belt and fuzz on his left leg and buckle. You are at the limit of the focal length distance to subject on this shot. There just weren't enough "pixels on the duck" (boy) for more detail. You only had about 600 total pixels from top to bottom of his face. Any one behind him is out of dof and thus would not be sharp.

One last bit, as a sanity check for yourself to remove AF concerns, came the shot to one taken with live view since it is always near perfect and will demonstrate the limit of the camera+lens. Always use proper shutter speed as you have.

Keep is posted.

Guy

gschlact wrote in post #17473695
I analyzed the first shot 137. To me, the I age is I. Sharpest focus for the middle boys 2nd from top button forward to about the gun in front of the middle boys left shoulder. I am on tablet so I don't know where you placed the focus point? I will assume for now it was on his chest near black strap and second button. Because this image had all the pixels (no crop), I estimated about 3ft (max) field of view top to bottom and therefore at 200mm and f4, you have 0.79ft dof. (just under 10inches). I do believe you have some front focus and based on this image and your comments, I would try to shift the focal plane about 5" back. This would be about +8 ticks or units of mfa. Why hasn't would be about 5 inches.

I also looked at image 595, my guess is that you focused on the center boy's chest who is perfect. Look at the stitching of belt and fuzz on his left leg and buckle. You are at the limit of the focal length distance to subject on this shot. There just weren't enough "pixels on the duck" (boy) for more detail. You only had about 600 total pixels from top to bottom of his face. Any one behind him is out of dof and thus would not be sharp.

Thank you all so much for your feedback, I really appreciate it!

The first shot, 562, the focus point was actually on the boy's left eye/nose area not the strap/button. And in 595 it was on the boy's eyes/nose/mouth not his chest. I've attached screen shots to show the point. If my chosen focus points are not the sharpest in the image, it seems like I need to do the microfocus adjustment as you suggest, correct? The quick focus test I ran on a tripod with a focus target didn't indicate a front focus issue. I guess I'll rerun the test.

Additionally, should I NOT be focusing on faces? But pick something with more contrast? It seems like that's what you are indicating with "my guess is that you focused on the center boy's chest who is perfect." comment.

Thanks!