I feel as if you must be running into MFD with that "real world" shot, that's a MUCH bigger backfocus than 2-4mm.
SolidxSnake Goldmember 1,656 posts Likes: 2 Joined Nov 2007 More info | Jun 15, 2009 18:01 | #31 I feel as if you must be running into MFD with that "real world" shot, that's a MUCH bigger backfocus than 2-4mm. Troubleshooting 101 (see also: LightRules,perryge):
LOG IN TO REPLY |
TeeWhy "Monkey's uncle" 10,596 posts Likes: 5 Joined Feb 2006 Location: Pasadena, CA More info | Jun 15, 2009 18:27 | #33 The first shot may be a touch backfocused. I personally wouldn't send it back for that. The second shot's focus is off by a bit. Not sure if it's entirely due to the camera/lens or not though. Gallery: http://tomyi.smugmug.com/
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Stickman Goldmember 1,966 posts Likes: 10 Joined Nov 2006 More info | Jun 15, 2009 19:14 | #34 Neilyb wrote in post #8111909 Send it back. You know that it does not work, why ask this lot? Skewed or not you can see the problem.
Stick
LOG IN TO REPLY |
angryhampster "Got a thick monopod?" 3,860 posts Likes: 3 Joined May 2006 Location: Iowa More info | Jun 15, 2009 19:41 | #35 2mm is not enough to fret about. The second test is in front of MFD. User error/apprehensiveness. This forum talks so much about poorly-calibrated lenses that people are forgetting how they actually work. Steve Lexa
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Yaamon Goldmember 1,435 posts Likes: 213 Joined Apr 2007 Location: Markham, Ontario More info | Send it with the body.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
HoldDaMayo Member 140 posts Joined Mar 2009 More info | Jun 15, 2009 20:40 | #37 Yaamon wrote in post #8116525 I would send the lens back with the body. You can explain that you have several other lens that focuses properly with the body and don't want to mess that up. Canon will then adjust the lens to focus on your body. It's that simple. Hers is my 85mm @F1.8 on a 50D with 0 MA. The 85mm that I have needs 0 ma on the 5D II and 50D and also focuses dead center with a xsi body. Want to sell it? Canon 40D, EF50mm F/1.8 II, Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8, Speedlite 430
LOG IN TO REPLY |
SolidxSnake Goldmember 1,656 posts Likes: 2 Joined Nov 2007 More info | Jun 15, 2009 21:08 | #38 angryhampster wrote in post #8116276 2mm is not enough to fret about. The second test is in front of MFD. User error/apprehensiveness. This forum talks so much about poorly-calibrated lenses that people are forgetting how they actually work. +1 Troubleshooting 101 (see also: LightRules,perryge):
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Yaamon Goldmember 1,435 posts Likes: 213 Joined Apr 2007 Location: Markham, Ontario More info | Sell the 85mm and go crazy looking for another that focuses as accurate, my hair will grey even faster.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
BigAlz1 THREAD STARTER Goldmember 1,475 posts Likes: 4 Joined Mar 2009 Location: Somewhere Great! More info | Jun 15, 2009 22:17 | #40 User error WOW...... This thread has took on a whole new life of it's own. I just love how you ask for advise and get called stupid....
LOG IN TO REPLY |
BigAlz1 THREAD STARTER Goldmember 1,475 posts Likes: 4 Joined Mar 2009 Location: Somewhere Great! More info | Jun 15, 2009 22:36 | #41 Yeah I would never want anything as small as a battery to be in focus anyway. Never an eyes ball or a watch, heck who needs 1.8? I'll stop it down to f8.0 and make pretend I got 1.8 ability.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
w7cma Senior Member 459 posts Likes: 7 Joined Aug 2008 Location: Missoula, Montana More info | That is the test I usually perform, definitely back focus. I shot this today 100% crop of original with slight USM. Good luck with Canon, lets us know how it turns out. With the touch of a button, I can speak a thousand words.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
iTookMyShot Goldmember 1,334 posts Likes: 73 Joined Mar 2006 Location: So Cal, USA More info | Jun 15, 2009 22:53 | #43 looks like you may be trying to focus too close... if your trying to focus too close, your camera sensor may be on the spot you want, but it will still show whats in focus at the correct distance 5D mkIV, 2x)7D mkII, 500 f4L IS mkII, 100-400L IS mkII, 70-200 2.8L IS mkII, 24-70 2.8L mkII, 16-35 2.8L mkIII, 100 2.8L IS, 600EX-RT x4
LOG IN TO REPLY |
BigAlz1 THREAD STARTER Goldmember 1,475 posts Likes: 4 Joined Mar 2009 Location: Somewhere Great! More info | Jun 15, 2009 22:55 | #44 Digitally_Altered.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
iTookMyShot Goldmember 1,334 posts Likes: 73 Joined Mar 2006 Location: So Cal, USA More info | Jun 15, 2009 23:03 | #45 ok, guess i didnt see that in the post, as they all look as if anything closest to the camera is out of focus... 5D mkIV, 2x)7D mkII, 500 f4L IS mkII, 100-400L IS mkII, 70-200 2.8L IS mkII, 24-70 2.8L mkII, 16-35 2.8L mkIII, 100 2.8L IS, 600EX-RT x4
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is ANebinger 1258 guests, 181 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||