MA Inconsistent

I decided to micro adjust my lenses to my 5DIII today. I dialed in my first adjustments in live view with the camera tethered using the LR shutter. I then took it out of live view to try shooting using the LR shutter but all of my settings were way off front focusing. I then used the camera shutter which made it back focus. I tried multiple shots and it keep changing from front to back focus. I'm using the center point focus, good lighting and my Spyder Lenscal. Any ideas why? It's happening on my Sigma 35mm Art. When I had it on my 5Dc it didn't have this issue and yes I use the dock.

showtm490 wrote in post #18744615
I decided to micro adjust my lenses to my 5DIII today. I dialed in my first adjustments in live view with the camera tethered using the LR shutter. I then took it out of live view to try shooting using the LR shutter but all of my settings were way off front focusing. I then used the camera shutter which made it back focus. I tried multiple shots and it keep changing from front to back focus. I'm using the center point focus, good lighting and my Spyder Lenscal. Any ideas why? It's happening on my Sigma 35mm Art. When I had it on my 5Dc it didn't have this issue and yes I use the dock.

You don't MA in Live-view. You do it through the viewfinder.

I'd like to download a great link for this but since Canon removed all their older articles, blogs and videos from their site I can't. I have not tried to find this one on an alternate site. Not that old. I think it was from 2016. I'll see if I can find it.

Focus inconsistent is the problem you have identified.

If the lens is focussing inconsistently there is no point in making any MFA adjustments.

The lens may be focussing inconsistently and only with your 5D3 or it may have started recently (ie will now be inconsistent with any body).
It may be your testing which is at fault.

What is "good light" ? Natural light?
Are you aware that the focus points displayed on the focus screen are just approximations of the actual focus points?
Are you shooting wide open? (to eliminate any focus shift)
Have you tried various test subjects?

Here is everything one needs to know about calibration:
https://photographylif​e.com/how-to-calibrate-lenses

Read carefully and do exactly as explained and you will be fine.

And yes; you need to calibrate the focus through view finder and not live view focus.

A member called joeseph found it at another location. Thanks very much for the help.

http://www.courtier.co​.nz …roAdjustGuide_d​esktop.pdf

I just put this up a day or two ago. It won't explain MFA, but if you want an explanation of why you don't use live view, it's in here.


https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18743864

.

Mathmans wrote in post #18745082
Here is everything one needs to know about calibration:
https://photographylif​e.com/how-to-calibrate-lenses

Read carefully and do exactly as explained and you will be fine.

And yes; you need to calibrate the focus through view finder and not live view focus.

.
This is the problem with the method you linked to:
.

.
You see, it still requires the photographer to look at the images and decide which is sharp and which is not.

What about people who simply can't get their eyes and their brains to work together to determine what degree of sharpness they are seeing? . Even when zoomed in 100% I often can't tell the difference between a perfectly sharp image and an almost perfectly sharp image and a fairly sharp image. . And my vision is perfect and I don't need glasses. . Many of us need science to give us some absolute determination as to which image is the sharpest, because we lack the ability to tell by looking at the images.

What we need is an MA method that doesn't require us to look at images and make value judgements as to their sharpness ..... some technology that tells us which is the sharpest, instead of making us try to figure it out by analyzing the images. . Anything else relies on a human to make a decision, and is therefore essentially flawed.


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18745262
.

What we need is an MA method that doesn't require us to look at images and make value judgements as to their sharpness ..... some technology that tells us which is the sharpest, instead of making us try to figure it out by analyzing the images. . Anything else relies on a human to make a decision, and is therefore essentially flawed.

.

I have good news. The technology you are looking for exists. I have been using FoCal software from Reikan for many years to adjust my lenses to my bodies. It has always worked well for me.

I have had that link for quite some time. Section 11. I followed that view about when to send something in before I found the article. I've been told many times that I'm nuts to send a lens in that needs +15. That article helped me justify my position on it and I know I'm a minority.

That happened to my 70-200 2.8 II and one reason I got ticked off at Canada CPS. +15 at 200mm. They told me it goes to +20 and sent it back. New Jersey found a mis-calibrated board. Two US Canon support reps told me that MFA is for emergencies only and encouraged me to send that lens in

Of course I'm going top do this if it needs +4. All the lenses I have purchased are under +-5. The higher values are great if you don't want to send it in, a lens known to be bit off or for 3rd party lenses.

bpalermini wrote in post #18745292
I have good news. The technology you are looking for exists. I have been using FoCal software from Reikan for many years to adjust my lenses to my bodies. It has always worked well for me.

I'm a FoCal supporter. I've done it manually which usually takes a long time for me as I second guess myself. FoCal does it in minutes and it has matched what I determined doing it manually.

The old battery test is pretty good. I found this the easiest to read. I use more batteries and they are tight to each other. I use spot focus to prevent the normal AF point from picking up the curvature of the battery on either side of centre.

I still make and distribute these for $15. It comes apart and stores easily.

I found a free MFA template that's the same concept as what TS is selling. The main difference is that you cut out the template and then have to take some time to paste it on foam-core and then spend more time cutting out. It's a bit of a steeper angle, so it can be hard to determine by the mm what's in focus with zoom lenses. But conceptually, this is the best way to MFA. As to the OP: the 5Dc didn't have live view, so you couldn't have done the same thing (and only trying to adjust MFA by live view will not give you good results since it's about trying to compensate for slight miss-alignment with your AF module in SLR mode). What makes targets like TS's good is that your focus plane is a clear target, and then you can see the diagonal ruler that might show front or back focus. The main caveat with this setup is that you get best results making sure your camera is directly parallel with your target (I make sure my DSLR is level and at the height of the focus target).

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18745396
I still make and distribute these for $15. It comes apart and stores easily.

I just have to make sure I have enough distance with the longer lenses, ecause I make sure that target area covers the center AF point, but is small enough that it fits inside the metering circle.

.
But doesn't using that device still require the photographer to look at the images and figure out what is in sharpest focus? . What if someone is incapable of looking at something and being able to tell what is really sharp and what isn't? . How would that kind of person do MA with your device?

I know that my questions may come across as critical and fault-finding, but that is not my intention. . I am genuinely curious about how to use your device (and other similar devices) if you can't look and see what is sharp and what isn't.


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18745583
.
But doesn't using that device still require the photographer to look at the images and figure out what is in sharpest focus? . What if someone is incapable of looking at something and being able to tell what is really sharp and what isn't? . How would that kind of person do MA with your device?

I know that my questions may come across as critical and fault-finding, but that is not my intention. . I am genuinely curious about how to use your device (and other similar devices) if you can't look and see what is sharp and what isn't.

.

I made such a device, speaking for myself, I could see which of the lines on the "ruler" were sharper. I found it easy to compare the relative sharpness of the lines.