7D Mark II - Focus Discussions

Here are a few examples the Chickadee was around 6 to 8 feet away from me sunny day light at my back no clouds.

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …t%20photo_zpsny​krxqzf.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …/_J2A4677_zpsvt​w74jsv.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …st%20shot_zpssf​mqtaad.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …st%20shot_zps4a​d3q3lx.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …/_J2A4587_zpsvz​r8pcce.jpg

This is one of the few from the other day that were decent

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …ckadee001_zpsc8​j3zhgk.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …nchicks25_zpsuo​jfthoc.jpg

gschlact wrote in post #17884813
Peter,
By any chance had your tried removing an reinstalling the lens just to see if it was bad contact or something? There had been an example pre where Cleaning contacts fixed thing up.

Thank you I will try that too.

On the chickadee shot, your DOF appears to be really thin, in fact not even deep enough to get the whole bird in focus. With such a thin DOF, it would be very easy to get OOF head shots, I would think. On the one you thought was decent had a deeper DOF, from what I can tell.

This is a risk with long lenses. I would often shoot with the Sigma 50-500 at 500mm and f6.3/f7.1 and one would think the DOF would be pretty deep. However shoot anything close to MFD or fairly close, and the DOF is quite, quite small, even at those apertures.

This is my take on the pics supplied, but you know better how you were shooting these (distance wise). Love the gull shot, it is like they all posed in a line for you.

Just purchased and received a 7d2 from a major retailer and was surprised to see that it came with firmware 1.0.2. Would it be fair to assume that the camera was manufactured more than a fear ago.

Sounds like it's been sitting,,,but don,t think that should be a problem. I,d make sure the battery is good. It is easy to add the new firmware.

JM45ACP wrote in post #17884856
Here are a few examples the Chickadee was around 6 to 8 feet away from me sunny day light at my back no clouds.

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …t%20photo_zpsny​krxqzf.jpg on photobucket

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …/_J2A4677_zpsvt​w74jsv.jpg on photobucket

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …st%20shot_zpssf​mqtaad.jpg on photobucket
The Gulls were around 15 to 20 feet away again sunny day no clouds sun at my back there is no PP on this shot no crop This is a good shot and what I would expect this set up to do most of the time.

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …st%20shot_zps4a​d3q3lx.jpg on photobucket
http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …/_J2A4587_zpsvz​r8pcce.jpg on photobucket

From this post, to me, it just seems like there is some back focus going on.
Had you mfa'ed the lens for both short end and long end values?

Yes I did the MFA on 7DII and 100-400mmLII combo and according to Focal I ran three test at 100mm @17 feet and had results of 0,+1,0. Three at 400mm @ 39 feet the results were 0,+2,0 it looks like it really didn't need anything.
I am going to try the DOT Tune process this weekend.

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …/_J2A3565_zpslg​4hhp37.jpg

JM45ACP wrote in post #17885411
Yes I did the MFA on 7DII and 100-400mmLII combo and according to Focal I ran three test at 100mm @17 feet and had results of 0,+1,0. Three at 400mm @ 39 feet the results were 0,+2,0 it looks like it really didn't need anything.
I am going to try the DOT Tune process this weekend.

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …/_J2A3565_zpslg​4hhp37.jpg on photobucket
Thanks
John

Running out of ideas to try to help.
Confirming IS was on for the previously displayed shots?
Which firmware version?
It can't hurt, why not reinstall the firmware and make sure you power off CA, Era and remove battery and flash card when completed. Then give another try. (reconfirm your mfa.)

13867 wrote in post #17884740
Just got off the phone with Canon. If you sign up for their complimentary 13 month canon care-pak at the time of signing up, you can get an extended care-pak warranty.

As long as you bought the item from an authorized Canon dealer, Not Just from the Canon on-line store, and the product meets the model requirements/time line.

I was quoted a 3 year extended warranty for $228.05.

CB

Forget the extended warranty, just insure your gear, a much better and cheaper option.

JM45ACP wrote in post #17884856
Here are a few examples the Chickadee was around 6 to 8 feet away from me sunny day light at my back no clouds.

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …t%20photo_zpsny​krxqzf.jpg on photobucket

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …/_J2A4677_zpsvt​w74jsv.jpg on photobucket

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …st%20shot_zpssf​mqtaad.jpg on photobucket
The Gulls were around 15 to 20 feet away again sunny day no clouds sun at my back there is no PP on this shot no crop This is a good shot and what I would expect this set up to do most of the time.

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …st%20shot_zps4a​d3q3lx.jpg on photobucket
http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …/_J2A4587_zpsvz​r8pcce.jpg on photobucket

Hi John,

A few thoughts that might help....

The first of these looks back focused (going by the branch below) but was there any subject movement even if small between achieving focus and the shutter actuation, possibly due to the branch or the main subject? I see from a following post the MA looks good, was the MA test at a similar distance to these subjects?

The second could be a lack of contrast in the main subject plus some pulling from the water ripples behind the head? Again looks back focussed.

I notice you are using AF point expansion for these, TBH I would use spot or at worst single point if they are not really moving much. The reasons being:

1) Although the frame shows the "current point" over the subject an early point might have been in play before shooting biasing the servo estimate of the ideal focus plane. (My understanding is it will use an assist point if the main point has insufficient contrast; also not sure what it indicates if it uses an assist point, might just show the main point, but I don't have anything to support that: I feel an experiment coming on... ).

2) The focus points are a lot larger than indicated and can be misaligned from the indicated location depending on the body, this is why I would use spot focus to constrain the focus area as much as possible.

Just trying to help you eliminate possible none mechanical things.

Lester Wareham wrote in post #17885677
Hi John,

A few thoughts that might help....

The first of these looks back focused (going by the branch below) but was there any subject movement even if small between achieving focus and the shutter actuation, possibly due to the branch or the main subject? I see from a following post the MA looks good, was the MA test at a similar distance to these subjects?

The second could be a lack of contrast in the main subject plus some pulling from the water ripples behind the head? Again looks back focussed.

I notice you are using AF point expansion for these, TBH I would use spot or at worst single point if they are not really moving much. The reasons being:

1) Although the frame shows the "current point" over the subject an early point might have been in play before shooting biasing the servo estimate of the ideal focus plane. (My understanding is it will use an assist point if the main point has insufficient contrast; also not sure what it indicates if it uses an assist point, might just show the main point, but I don't have anything to support that: I feel an experiment coming on... ).

2) The focus points are a lot larger than indicated and can be misaligned from the indicated location depending on the body, this is why I would use spot focus to constrain the focus area as much as possible.

Just trying to help you eliminate possible none mechanical things.

@John,
One more idea to, add to Lester who confirms my back focus earlier comments. I hadn't realized you were in expanded more; this alone is likely the issue as Lester explains. Additionally, to remove a variable, you may want to check your First and Second Priority to set to Focus instead of Speak. Based on this info, likely nothing wrong with your camera.

Lester Wareham wrote in post #17885677
Hi John,

A few thoughts that might help....

The first of these looks back focused (going by the branch below) but was there any subject movement even if small between achieving focus and the shutter actuation, possibly due to the branch or the main subject? I see from a following post the MA looks good, was the MA test at a similar distance to these subjects?

The second could be a lack of contrast in the main subject plus some pulling from the water ripples behind the head? Again looks back focussed.

I notice you are using AF point expansion for these, TBH I would use spot or at worst single point if they are not really moving much. The reasons being:

1) Although the frame shows the "current point" over the subject an early point might have been in play before shooting biasing the servo estimate of the ideal focus plane. (My understanding is it will use an assist point if the main point has insufficient contrast; also not sure what it indicates if it uses an assist point, might just show the main point, but I don't have anything to support that: I feel an experiment coming on... ).

2) The focus points are a lot larger than indicated and can be misaligned from the indicated location depending on the body, this is why I would use spot focus to constrain the focus area as much as possible.

Just trying to help you eliminate possible none mechanical things.

gschlact wrote in post #17885785
@John,
One more idea to, add to Lester who confirms my back focus earlier comments. I hadn't realized you were in expanded more; this alone is likely the issue as Lester explains. Additionally, to remove a variable, you may want to check your First and Second Priority to set to Focus instead of Speak. Based on this info, likely nothing wrong with your camera.

Update to my point in red above, the manual says:

JM45ACP wrote in post #17885411
Yes I did the MFA on 7DII and 100-400mmLII combo and according to Focal I ran three test at 100mm @17 feet and had results of 0,+1,0. Three at 400mm @ 39 feet the results were 0,+2,0 it looks like it really didn't need anything.
I am going to try the DOT Tune process this weekend.

IMAGE LINK: http://i1237.photobuck​et.com …/_J2A3565_zpslg​4hhp37.jpg on photobucket
Thanks
John

JM45ACP if you have Focal did you do the focus Consistency test here is a screen shot of one I did last night for you to have a look at.

They do not show in AI Servo, only in One Shot. If you try this in One Shot and the centre point cannot locate enough contrast an outer point will illuminate followed by the centre point which I figure shows the intended AF point. It is always only one assist point, never two or more. If you read Canon's documentation it says expansion modes work the same way in AI Servo as it does in One Shot. Based on that I figure only one assist point is active at any given time but as per discussion we only see the centre point illuminated in the view finder and in DPP, etc in post.